^^

— -^

—

^'^

a:^—

= [>-

r.

^OO

L.

= C0

r.

> ^5^

— O

LT.

>

CD

^^^

____ ' '

<^

THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY

Xea^ers in Science

Thomas Henry Huxley

A SKETCH OF HIS LIFE AND WORK

BY

P. CHALMERS MITCHELL, M.A. {Oxoii.)

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS

NEW YORK LONDON

27 WEST TWENTY-THIRD STREET 24 BEDFORD STREET, STRAND

S^E f nitktrbotkcr ^rtss
igoo

Copyright, igoo

BV

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS

HqMG

64G539

XTbe iknicfierbocfecc press, -Mew jgorh

PREFACE

THIS volume is in no sense an intimate or author-
ised biography of Huxle)-. It is simply an out-
line of the external features of his life and an account
of his contributions to biology, to educational and
social problems, and to philosophy and metaphysics.
In preparing it, I have been indebted to his own
Autobiography, to the obituary notice written by Sir
Michael Foster for the Royal Society of London, to a
sketch of him by Professor Howes, his successor at the
Royal College of Science, and to his published works.
The latter consist of many well-known separate vol-
umes which are familiar to all zoologists, and of a vast
number of memoirs and essays scattered in various
scientific and general publications. The general Essays
were collected into nine volumes, revised by himself
in the later years of his life, and published by Messrs.
Macmillan. The Scientific Memoirs, thanks to the
generous enterprise of the same publishing firm, with
which he was so long associated, and to the pious
labours of Sir Michael Foster and Professor Ray
Lankester, are in process of reissue in the form of four
volumes, two of which have now appeared. These will
contain all his important contributions to science, with
the exception of a large separate treatise on the Oceanic

VI

Preface

Hydrozoa, published by the Ray Society in 1859.
y There is also announced a formal Biography, prepared
by his son, so that future admirers or students of
Huxley's work will be in an exceptionally favourable
position.

London, 1900.

P. CHAI^MERS MITCHELL.

•'J.I,

C J^l-*-^

c/

'I i ^

h^.

CONTENTS

Preface

I'AGE

iii

CHAPTER I

FROM SCHOOL TO LIFE-WORK

Birth — Parentage — School-days — Choice of Medical
Profession — Charing Cross Hospital — End of Medical
Studies — Admission to Naval Medical Service.

CHAPTER II

THE VOYAGE OF THE "RATTLESNAKE"

The Objects of the Voyage — The Route — The Na-
turalist and the Surgeon — Collecting and Dredging—
Stay in Sydney — Adventures with the Natives — Com-
parison with Darwin's Voyage on the Beagle.

CHAPTER III

FLOATING CREATURES OF THE SEA

The Nature of Floating Life — Memoir on Medusee
Accepted by the Royal Society — Old and New Ideas
of the Animal Kingdom — What Huxley Discovered
in Medusae
Embryos.

- His Comparison of them with Vertebrate

Vll

vi'ii Contents

CHAPTER IV

PAGE

EARLY DAYS IN LONDON 46

Scientific Work as Unattached Ship-Surgeon — Intro-
duction to Loudon Scientific Society — Translating,
Receiving, and Lecturing — Ascidians -^Molluscs and
the Archetype^ Criticism of Pre-Darwiuian Evolution
— Appointment to Geological Survey. --,.

CHAPTER V

CREATURES OF THE PAST

Beginning Palasontological Work — Fossil Amphibia
and Reptilia — Ancestry of Birds — Ancestry of the
Horse — Imperfect European Series Completed by
Marsh's American Fossils — Meaning of Geological Con-
temporaneity — Uniformitarianism and Catastrophism
Compared with Evolution in Geology— Age of the
Earth — Intermediate and Linear Types.

CHAPTER VI

HUXLEY AND DARWIN 89

Early Ideas on Evolution — Erasmus Darwin — Lamarck
— Herbert Spencer^ Difference between Evolution and
Natural Selection — Huxley's Preparation for Evolu-
tion— The Novelty of Natural Selection — The Ad-
vantage of Natural Selection as a Working Hypothesis
— Huxley's LTnchanged Position with regard to Evolu- (

tion and Natural Selection from i860 to 1894.

CHAPTER VII

4,

HE BATTLE FOR EVOLUTION . . . .TIG

Huxley's Prevision of the Battle — The Causes of the
Battle — The Times Review — Sir Richard Owen attacks

y

Contents ix

PAGE

Darwinism in the Edinburgh Review — Bishop Wilber-
force attacks in the Quarterly Review — Huxley's
Scathing Replies — The British Association Debates at
Oxford — Huxley and Wilberfbrce — Resume of Hux-
ley's Exact Position with Regard to Evolution and to
Natural Selection.

CHAPTER Vin

VERTEBRATE ANATOMY 1 28

The Theory of the Vertebrate Skull^Goethe, Oken, -

Cuvier, and Owen — Huxley Defends Goethe — His /

own Contributions to the Theory — The Classification 1

of Birds — Huxley Treats them as " Extinct Animals " \

— Geographical Distribution — Sclater's Regions — \

Huxley's Suggestions. '

y

CHAPTER IX

MAN AND THE APES 144

Objections to Zoological Discussion of Man's Place —
Owen's Prudence — Huxley's Determination to Speak
out — Account of his Treatment of Man's Place in
Nature — Additions Made by More Recent Work.

CHAPTER X

SCIENCE AS A BRANCH OF EDUCATION . . 167

Science-Teaching Fifty Years Ago — Huxley's Insist-
ence on Reform — Science Primers — Physiography —
Elementary Physiology — The Crayfish — Manuals of
Anatomy — Modern Microscopical Methods — Practical
Work in Biological Teaching — Invention of the Type
System — Science iu Medical Education— Science and
Culture.

CHAPTER XI

GENERAL PROBLEMS OF EDUCATION . . . 188

Establishment of Compulsory Education in England

X Contents

PAGE

— The Religious Coutroversy — Huxley Advocates the
Bible without Theology — His Compromise on the
" Cowper-Temple " Clause — Influence of the New
Criticism — Science and Art Instruction — Training of
Teachers — University Education — The Baltimore Ad-
dress — Technical Education — So-called " Applied
Science " — National Systems of Education as "Ca-
pacity-Catchers. ' '

CHAPTER XII

CITIZEN, ORATOR, AND ESSAYIST . . . 204

Huxley's Activity in Public Affairs — OfiBcial in Sci-
entific Societies — Royal Commissions — Vivisection
— Characteristics of his Public Speaking — His Method
of Exposition — His Essays — Vocabulary — Phrase-
Making — His Style Essentially One of Ideas.

CHAPTER XIII

THE OPPONENT OF MATERIALISM . . .2X8

Science and Metaphysics — Berkeley, Hume, and
Hobbes — Existence of Matter and Mind — Descartes's
Contribution — Materialism and Idealism — Criticism of
Materialism — Berkeley's Idealism — Criticism of Ideal-
ism— Empirical Idealism — Materialism as opposed to
Supernaturalism — Mind and Brain — Origin of Life —
Teleology, Chance, and the Argument from Design.

CHAPTER XIV

FREEDOM OF THOUGHT 232

Authority and Knowledge in Science — The Duty of
Doubt — Authority and Individual Judgment in Re-
ligion— The Protestant Position — Sir Charles Lyell
and the Deluge — Infallibility — The Church and
Science — Morality and Dogma — Civil and Religious
Liberty — Agnosticism and Clericalism — Meaning of

Contents xl

PAGE

Agnosticism — Knowledge and Evidence — The Me-
thod of Agnosticism.

CHAPTER XV

THE BIBLE AND MIRACLES 245

Why Huxley Came to Write about the Bible — A Magna
Charta of the Poor — ^The Theological Use of the Bible
— The Doctrine of Biblical Infallibility — The Bible and
Science — The Three Hypotheses of the Earth's History

— Changes in the Past Proved — The Creation Hy-
pothesis— Gladstone on Genesis — Genesis not a Record
of Fact — The Hypothesis of Evolution — The New Tes-
tament— Theory of Inspiration — Reliance on the
Miraculous — The Continuity of Nature no a priori
Argument against Miracles — Possibilities and Impos-
sibilities— Miracles a Question of Evidence — Praise of
the Bible.

CHAPTER XVI

ETHICS OF THE COSMOS 26 1

Conduct and Metaphysics — Conventional and Critical
Minds — Good and Evil — Huxley's Last Appearance at
Oxford — The Ethical Process and the Cosmic Process

— Man's Intervention-^ The Cosmic Process Evil-
Ancient Reconciliations — Modern Acceptance of the
Difficulties — Criticism of Huxley's Pessimism — Man
and his Ethical Aspirations Part of the Cosmos.

CHAPTER XVII

CLOSING DAYS AND SUMMARY .... 275

Huxley's Life in London — Decennial Periods — Ill-
health — Retirement to Eastbourne — Death — Personal
Appearance — Methods of Work — Personal Character-
istics— An Inspirer of Others — His Influence in Science
— A Naturalist by Vocation — His Aspirations.

Index 287

ILLUSTRATIONS

THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY — From a photograph by
London Stereoscopic Company . Frontispiece

THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY, 1^^']— Reproduced by
permissio)i from ''Natural Science,'" vol. vii.,
No. 42 64

SIR JOSEPH DALTON HOOKER — From a photoffraph

by Elliott and Fry, London .... 98

CHARLES DARWIN — From the painting by Hon.

John Collier in the N^ational Portrait Gallery, 146

SIR CHARLES LYELL — From a photograph by Lon-
don Stereoscopic Company .... 236

CARICATURE OF HUXLEY DRAWN BY HIMSELF —

Reproduced bv permission from '' Nattcral
Science,'" vol. vii., No. ^6 . . . . 276

xin

WST OF HUXI^EY'S WRITINGS

THIS list is offered, not as a bibliography in the
technical sense, bnt as an indication of the sources
in which the vast majority of Huxley's scientific and
general work may be consulted most conveniently.

The Scientific Memoirs of Thomas Henry Huxley. Edited
by Professor Sir Michael Foster and Professor E.
Ray Lankester ; in four volumes. London, Mac-
millan & Co.; New York, D. Appleton.

This magnificent collection is intended to contain all Huxley's
original scientific papers, brought together from the multitude
of scientific periodicals in which they appeared, with reproduc-
tions of the original illustrations. The only exception is the
monograph on Oceanic Hydrozoa. The first volume appeared
in 1898 ; the second in 1899, and the others are to follow quickly.

Collected Essays by T. H. Huxley ; nine volumes of the
Eversley Series. Macmillan & Co. London,

1893-95-
This set, edited by Huxley himself, contains the more im-
portant of his more general contributions to science and his
literary, philosophical, and political and critical essays. Each
volume has a preface specially written, and the first volume
contains his autobiography.

XV

xvi List of Huxley's Writings

The Oceanic 1 fydrozoa ; a description of the Caly-
cophoridae and PhysophoridK observed during the
Voyage of H.M.S. Rattlesnake in the years 1846-
50, with a general introduction. Ray Society.
London, 1859.

Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature. Williams &
Norgate, lyondon, 1863.

On our Knoivlcdge of the Causes of Organic Phenomena ;
being Six Lectures to Working Men. Hardwicke.
lyondon, 1863.

Lectures on the Elenie7its of Comparative Anatomy. On
the Classification of Animals and the Vertebrate
Skull. Churchill & Sons. Ivondon, 1864.

An Elementary Atlas of Comparative Osteology. In
twelve plates. Williams & Norgate. London,
1864.

Lessons in Elementary Physiology. Macmillan & Co.
London, 1866.

An hitroduction to the Classif cation of Animals.
Churchill. London, 1869.

A Manual of the Anatomy of Vertebrated Animals.
Churchill, London, 1871.

A Cotirse of Practical Instruction iji El emeiitary Biology^
assisted by H. N. Martin. Macmillan. London,

1875-

A Manual of the Anatomy of Invertebrated Animals.
Churchill. London, 1877.

List of Huxley's Writings xvii

Lay Sermons, Essays, and Reviews. Macmillan. Lon-
don. 1877.

American Addresses, with a Lecture on the Study of
Biology. Macmillan. London, 1877.

Physiography, an Introduction to the Study of Zoology.
International Scientific Series. Kegan Paul.
London, 1880.

Introductory Primer. Science Primers. Macmillan.
London, 1880.

The Life and Letters of Charles Darivin. Edited by
his son, Francis Darwin. Volume II., with
Chapter V. hy Professor Huxley on the Reception
oi^he. Origin of Species. John Murray. London,
1887.

Life of Richard Ozveyi. By his grandson. With an
Essay on Owen's Position in Anatomical Science,
by T. H. Huxley. John Murray. London, 1894.

0^/4

\i

-fY /6/ Ji, (US' e^ '^ J'' iiv*

THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY

CHAPTER I

FROM SCHOOI. TO UFE-WORK

Birth — Parentage — School-days — Choice of Medical Profes-
sion — Charing Cross Hospital — End of Medical Studies —
Admission to Naval Medical Service.

SOME men are born to greatness: even before their
arrival in the world their future is marked out for
them. All the advantages that wealth and the experi-
ence of friends can bring attend their growth to man-
hood, and their success almost loses its interest because
of the ease with which it is attained. Few of the lead-
ers of science were in such a position : many of them,
such as Priestley, Davy, Faraday, John Hunter, and
Linnaeus were of htimble parentage, and received the
poorest education : most of them, like Huxley himself,
have come from parents who were able to do little more
for their children than set them out into life along the
ordinary educational avenues. In Huxley's boyhood
at least a comfortable income was necessary for this: in
every civilised country nowadays, state endowments,

2 Thomas Henry Huxley

or private endowments, are ready to help every
capable boy, as far as Huxley was helped, and in his
progress from boyhood to supreme distinction, there is
nothing that cannot be emulated by every boy at school
to-day. The minds of human beings when they are
born into the world are as naked as their bodies ; it
matters not if parents, grandparents, and remoter an-
cestors were unlettered or had the wisdom of all the
ages, the new mind has to build up its own wisdom
from the beginning. We cannot even sa}^ with cer-
tainty that children inherit mental aptitudes and capac-
ities from their parents ; for as tall sons may come
from short parents or beautiful daughters from ugly
parents, so we msLy find in the capacities of the parents
no traces of the future greatness of their children.
None the less it is interesting to learn what we can
about the parents of great men ; and Huxley tells us
that he thinks himself to have inherited many charac-
ters of his body and mind from his mother.

Thomas Henr}^ Huxley was born on the 4th of
May, 1825, at Ealing, then a little country village,
now united to London as a great suburb. He was the
seventh child of George Huxle}^ who was second
master at the school of Dr. Nicholson at Ealing. In
these days private schools of varying character were
very numerous in England, and this establishment
seems to have been of high-class character, for Cardinal
Newman and many other distinguished men received
part of their education there. His mother, whose
maiden name was Rachel Withers, was, he tells us
himself : *

* This and many other details in this chapter are taken from
an autobiographical sketch in the first volume of Huxley's col-
lected essays published by Macmillan, London, 1894.

Parentage 3

"A slender brunette of an emotional and energetic tempera-
ment, and possessed of the most piercing black eyes I ever saw
in a woman's head. With no more education than other women
of the middle classes in her day, she had an excellent mental
capacity. Her most distinguishing characteristic, however, was
rapidity of thought. If one ventured to suggest she had not
taken much time to arrive at any conclusion, she would say, 'I
cannot help it. Things flash across me.' That peculiarity has
been passed on to me in full strength : it has often stood me in
good stead : it has sometimes played me sad tricks, and it has
always been a danger. But, after all, if my time were to come
over again there is nothing I would less willingly part with than
my inheritance of ' mother wit.' "

From his father he thinks that he inherited little
except an inborn capacity for drawing, "a hot tem-
per, and that amount of tenacity of purpose which
unfriendly observers sometimes call obstinacy." As it
happened, this natural gift for drawing proved of the
greatest service to him throughout his career. It is
imperative that every investigator of the anatomy of
plants and animals should be able to sketch his observ-
ations, and there is no greater aid to seeing things as
they are than the continuous attempt to reproduce
them by pencil or brush.

Huxley was christened Thomas Henry, and he was
unaware why these names were chosen, but he humor-
ously records the curious chance that his parents should
hav'e chosen for him the " name of that particular
apostle with whom he had always felt most sympathy."

Of his childhood little is recorded. He remembers
being vain of his curls, and his mother's expressed
regret that he soon lost the beauty of early childhood.
He attended for some time the school at Ealing with
which his father was associated, but he has little to say
for the training he received there. He writes :

4 Thomas Henry Huxley

"My regular school training was of the briefest, perhaps for-
tunately : for, though my way of life has made me acquainted
with all sorts and conditions of men, from the highest to the
lowest, I deliberately affirm that the society I fell into at school
was the worst I have ever known. We boys were average lads
with much the same inherent capacity for good and evil as any
others ; but the people who were set over us cared about as
much for our intellectual and moral welfare as if they were
baby-farmers. We were left to the operation of the struggle
for existence among ourselves, and bullying was the least of the
ill practices current among us. Almost the only cheerful re-
miniscence in connection with the place which arises in my mind
is that of a battle which I had with one of my class-mates, who
had bullied me until I could stand it no longer. I was a very
slight lad, but there was a wild-cat element in me which, when
roused, made up for my lack of weight, and I licked my adver-
sary effectually. However, one of m^' first experiences of the
extremely rough and ready nature of justice, as exhibited by
the course of things in general, arose out of the fact that /—the
victor — had a black eye, while he — the vanquished — had none,
so that I got into disgrace and he did not. One of the greatest
shocks I ever received in my life was to be told, a dozen years
afterwards by the groom who brought me my horse in a stable-
yard in Sydney, that he was my quondam antagonist. He had
a long story of family misfortune to account for his position —
but at that time it was necessary to deal very cautiously with
mysterious strangers in New South Wales, and on enquiry I
found that the unfortunate young man had not only been ' sent
out,' but had undergone more than one colonial conviction."

Huxley was soon removed from school and continued
his own education for several years, b}- reading of the
most destiltory sort. His special inclinations w^ere
towards mechanical problems, and -had he been able to
follow his own wishes there is little doubt but that he
would have entered on the profession of an engineer.
It is probable that there was a great deal more in his
wnshes than the familiar inclination of a clever boy to

Choice of Profession 5

engineering. All through the pursuit of anatonn','^
which was the chief business of his life, it was the
structure of animals, the different modifications of great
ground-plans which they presented, that interested
him. But the opportunity for engineering did not
present itself, and at an exceedingl)^ early age he
began to study medicine. Two brothers-in-law were
doctors, and this accidental fact probablj^ determined
his choice. In these daj^s the stud^ of medicine did_
not begin as now with a general and scientific education,
but the young medical student was apprenticed to a
doctor engaged in practice. He was supposed to learn
the compounding of drugs in the dispensary attached
to the doctor's consulting-room ; to be taught the dress-
ing of wounds and the superficial details of the medical
craft while he pursued his studies in anatomy under
the direction of the doctor. Huxley's master was his
brother-in-law. Dr. Salt, a London practitioner, and he
began his work when only twelve or thirteen yesLts of
age. In this system everything depended upon the
superior ; under the careful guidance of a conscientious
and able man it was possible for an apt pupil to learn
a great deal of science and to become an expert in the
treatment of disease. Huxley, however, had only a
short experience of this kind of training. He was
taken by some senior student friends to a post-mortem
examination, and although then, as all through his
life, he was most sensitive to the disagreeable side of
anatomical pursuits, on this occasion he gratified his
curiosity too ardently. He did not cut himself, but in
some way poisonous matter from the body affected him,
and he fell into so bad a state of health that he had to
be sent into the country to recruit. He lived for some
time at a farmhouse in Warwickshire with friends of

6 Thomas Henry Huxley

his father and slowl}' recovered health. From that
time, however, all through his life, heL-Suffered period-
jically from prostrating d3'spepsia. After some months
devoted to promiscuous reading he resumed his work
under his brother-in-law in London. He confesses
that he was far from a model student.

"I worked extremely bard when it pleased me, and wlien it
did not, — which was a frequent case, — I was extremely idle
(unless making caricatures of one's pastors and masters is to be
called a branch of industry), or else wasted my energies in
wrong directions. I read everything I could lay hands upon,
including novels, and took up all sorts of pursuits to drop them
again quite speedily."

It is almost certain, however, that Huxley underesti-
mated the value of this time. He stored his mind with
both literature and science, and laid the foundation of
the extremely varied intellectual interests which after-
wards proved to him of so much value. It is certain,
also, that during this time he acquired a fair know-
ledge of French and German. It would be difficult to
exaggerate the value to him of this addition to his
weapons for attacking knowledge. To do the best
work in any scientific pursuit it is necessarj- to freshen
one's own mind by contact with the ideas and results
of other workers. As these workers are scattered over
different countries it is necessary to transcend the con-
fusion of Babel and read what they write in their own
tongues. When Huxley was young, the great reputa-
tion of Cuvier overshadowed English anatomy, and
English anatomists did little more than seek in nature
what Cuvier had taught them to find. In German}^
other men and other ideas were to be found. Johannes
Mueller and Von Baer were attacking the problems of

Foreign Languages 7

nature in a spirit that was entirely dififerent, and Hux-
ley, by combining what he was taught in England with
what he learned from German methods, came to his
own investigations with a wider mind. But his con-
quest of French and German brought with it advant-
ages in addition to these technical gains. There is no
reason to believe that he troubled himself with gram-
matical details and with the study of these languages
as subjects in themselves. He acquired them simply
to discover the new ideas concealed in them, and he
by no means confined himself to the reading of foreign
books on the subjects of his own studies. He read
French and German poetry, literature, and philosophy,
and so came to have a knowledge of the ideas of those
outside his own race on all the great problems that
interest mankind. A good deal has been written as to
the narrowing tendency of scientific pursuits, but with
Huxley, as with all the scientific men the present writer
has known, the mechanical necessity of learning to
read other languages has brought with it that wide
intellectual sympathy which is the beginning of all cult-
ure and which is not infrequently missed by those who
have devoted themselves to many grammars and a vSin-
gle literature. The old proverb, " Whatever is worth
doing is worth doing well," has only value when
" well " is properly interpreted. Although the science
of language is as great as any science, it is not the sci-
ence of language, but the practical interpretation of it,
that is of value to most people, and there is much to be
said for the method of anatomists like Huxley, who
passed lightly over grammatical niinuticB and went
straight with a dictionary to the reading of each new
tongue.

After a short period of apprenticeship, or sometimes

8 Thomas Henry Huxley

duritig- the course of it, the yoiinj^ medical students
"walked" a hospital. This consisted in attending
the demonstrations of the physicians and surgeons in
the wards of the hospital and in pursuing anatomical,
chemical, and physiological study in the medical school
attached to the hospital. A large fee was charged for
the complete course, but at many of the hospitals there
were entrance scholarships which relieved those who
gained them of all cost. In 1842 Huxley and his elder
brother, James, applied for such free scholarships at
Charing Cross Hospital. There is no record in the
books of the hospital as to what persons supported the
application. The entry in the minutes for September
6, 1842, states that

"Applications from the following gentlemen (including the
two sous of Mr. George Huxley, late senior assistant master in
Ealing School), were laid before the meeting, and their testi-
monials being approved of, it was decided that those gentlemen
should be admitted as free scholars, if their classical attain-
ments should be found upon examination to be satisfactory."

It appears that the two Huxleys were able to satisfy
the probably unexactiug demands of the classical ex-
aminers, for they began their hospital work in October
of the same year.

Those who know the magnificent laboratories and
lecture-rooms which have grown up in connection with
the larger London hospitals must have difficulty in
realising the humble arrangements for teaching stu-
dents in the early forties. What endowments there
were — and Charing Cross was never a richly endowed
hospital — were devoted entirely to the hospital as
opposed to the teaching school. There were no sep-
arate buildings for anatomy, physiology, and so forth.

Charing Cross Hospital 9

At Charing Cross the dissecting-room was in a cellar
under the hospital, and subjects like chemistry, botany,
physiology, and so forth were crowded into incon-
venient side rooms. The teachers were not specialists,
devoting their whole attention to particular branches
of science, but were doctors engaged in practice, who,
in addition to their private duties and their work at the
hospital, each undertook to lecture upon a special
scientific subject. Huxley came specially under the
influence of Mr. Wharton Jones, who had begun to
teach physiology at the hospital a j'ear before. Mr.
Jones throughout his life was engaged in professional
work, his specialt}' being ophthalmic surgery, but he
was a devoted student of anatomy and physiology, and
made several classical contributions to scientific know-
ledge, his best-known discoveries relating to Mood cor-
puscles and to the nature of the mammalian egg-cell.
But perhaps his greatest claim to fame is that it was he
who first imbued Huxley with a love for anatomical
science and with a knowledge of the methods of inves-
tigation. At the end of his first session, in 1843,
Huxley received the first prize in the senior physiol-
ogy class, while his brother got a ' ' good conduct ' '
prize. Of Wharton Jones Huxley writes :

"The extent and precision of his knowledge impressed me
greatly, and the severe exactness of his method of lecturing
was quite to my taste. I do not know that I have ever felt so
much respect for anybody as a teacher before or since. I
worked hard to obtain his approbation, and he was extremely
kind and helpful to the youngster who, I am afraid, took up
more of his time than he had any right to do. It was he who
suggested the publication of my first scientific paper — a very
little one — in the IMedical Gazette of 1845, and most kindly
corrected the literary faults which abounded in it short as it

lO Thomas Henry Huxley

was. For at that time, and for many years afterwards, I de-
tested the trouble of writing and wouhl take no pains over it."

This little paper, although Huxley deprecates it, was
remarkable as the work of so young an investigator.
In it he demonstrated the existence of a hitherto un-
recognised layer in the inner root-sheath of hairs, a
layer that has been known since as Huxley's layer.

There is no record in the minutes of the hospital
school that Hujle}- gained any other school prizes.
His name reappears only in formal applications at the
beginning of each session for the renewal of his free
scholarship. In this respect he is in marked contrast
to his fellow-student, afterwards Sir Joseph Fayrer,
who appears to have taken almost every prize open to
him. On the other hand, his attainments in anatomy
and physiology brought him distinction in a wider
field than the hospital school, for he obtained, in the
" honours" division of the first examination for the
degree of Bachelor of Medicine at the University of
London, the second place with a medal. And it is
certain that he was far from neglecting his strictly pro-
fessional work, although, no doubt, he devoted much
time to reading and research in pure science, for in the
winter of 1845-46, having completed his course at the
hospital, he was prepared to offer himself at the exam-
ination for the membership of the Royal College of
Surgeons ; but, being as yet under twenty-one years of
age, could not be admitted as a candidate.

It was now time for Huxley definitely to enter on
his profession. He would have preferred to continue
his investigations in London and to wait for the chance
of a teaching post in physiology, but it was necessary
to earn a living. One of those whom he consulted was

Sir W. Burnett 1 1

his fellow-student, Joseph Fayrer, who, hailing from
Bermuda, knew something of those who go down to
the sea in ships. He advised Huxley to write to Sir
William Burnett, at that time Director-General for the
medical service of the navy, for an appointment.

" I thought this rather a strong thing to do," says Huxley in
his autobiography, " as Sir William was personally unknown
to me; but my cheery friend would not listen to my scruples,
so I went to my lodgings and wrote the best letter I could de-
vise. A few da^'s afterwards I received the usual oflEicial circu-
lar of acknowledgement, but at the bottom was written an
instruction to call at Somerset House on such a day. I thought
that looked like business, so, at the appointed time I called
and sent in my card, while I waited in Sir William's ante-room.
He was a tall, shrewd-looking old gentleman, with a broad
Scotch accent — and I think I see him now as he entered with
my card in his hand. The first thing he did was to return it
with the frugal reminder that I should probably find it useful
on some other occasion. The second was to ask whether I was
an Irishman. I suppose the air of modesty about my appeal
must have struck him. I satisfied the Director-General that I
was English to the backbone, and he made some enquiries as
to my student career, finally desiring me to hold myself
ready for examination. Having passed this, I was in Her
Majesty's service, aud entered on the books of Nelson's old
ship, the Victory, for duty at Haslar Hospital, about a couple
of months after I made my application."

About the same time he passed the examination of
the Royal College of Surgeons and so became a ftilly
qualified medical man. Haslar Hospital was the chief
naval hospital to which invalided sailors were sent.
There was a considerable staff of young surgeons, as
navy stirgeons were usually sent for a term to work in
the hospital before being gazetted to a ship in commis-
sion. In connection with the hospital, there was a

12 Thomas Henry Huxley

museum of natural history containing a collection of
considerable importance slowly gathered from the gifts
of sailors and officers. The museum curator was an
enthusiastic naturalist, and Huxley must have had the
opportunity of extending his knowledge of at least the
external characters of many forms of life hitherto un-
known to him. A few years later, the curator of the
nuiseum, with the help of two of Huxley's succes.sors,
published a Manual of Natural History for the Use of
Traveller's, and it is certain that Huxley at least did
not lose at Haslar any of the enthusiasm for zoology
with which he had been inspired at the Charing Cross
Hospital. The chief of the hospital was Sir John
Richardson, an excellent naturalist, and well known
as an arctic explorer. He seems to have recognised
the peculiar ability of his young assistant, and al-
though he was a silent, reserved man, who seldom
encouraged his assistants by talking to them, he made
several attempts to obtain a suitable post for Huxley.
Such a post was that of surgeon to H.M.S. Rattlesnake,
then about to start under the command of Captain
Owen Stanley for surveying work in the Torres Straits.
Captain Stanley had expressed a wish for a surgeon
who knew something of science, and, on the recom-
mendation of Sir John Richardson, obtained the post
for Huxley. There was, however, to be a special nat-
uralist attached to the expeditiou, but Huxley had the
opportunity he wanted. After a brief stay of seven
months at the Haslar Hospital he left it for his ship,
and thus definitely entered on his work in the world.

CHAPTER II

THE VOYAGE OF THE "RATTLESNAKE"

The Objects of the Voyage — The Route — The Naturalist and
the Surgeon — Collecting and Dredging — Stay in Sydney
— Adventures with the Natives — Comparison v?ith Dar-
win's Voyage on the Beagle.

HER Majesty's ship the Rattlesnake, one of the old
class of 28-guti ships, sailed from Plymouth for
the Torres Straits and the Australian seas on Decem-
ber 12, 1846. Her commander was Captain Owen
Stanley, a yotmg but distinguished officer, the son of
the Bishop of Norwich and a brother of Dean Stanley,
who afterwards played so great a part in the social and
religiotis history of England. She carried a comple-
ment of 180 officers and men, and was attended by the
Bramble and the Castlercagh, two small vessels of light
draught, whose purpose was to precede her in shallow
waters. The yotmg colonies of Atistralia were develop-
ing commerce with the mother country, and the busi-
ness of the Rattlesnake was to survey the waters round
about the Torres Straits, that the passage towards India
on the homeward trip might be made safer. Inci-
dentally the vessel was to land a treasure of ^^50,000 at
the Cape of Good Hope, and another of ^15,000 at the
Mauritius. The Admiralty Commissioners left ftill

13

14 Thomas Henry lluxlcy

powers to Captain Stanley to carry out the details of
his mission according to his own judgment, but he was
solemnly warned upon two points. Many very un-
fortunate casualties had occurred when sailors came in
contact with the little-known savages of the southern
seas, and the Admiralty instructed him as follows :

" In stretching off from the Barrier Reefs to the eastward, in
order to explore the safety of the sea intervening between
them and Ivouisiade and New Guinea, you will have occasion to
approach these shores, in which case you must constantly be
on your guard against the treacherous disposition of their in-
habitants. All barter for refreshments must be conducted
under the eye of an officer, and every pains be taken to avoid
giving any just cause of offence to their prejudices, especially
with respect to their women."

The second warning concerned grave international
matters. European politics were in the unsettled con-
dition which, after the illusive international courtesies
of the Great Exhibition of 1851, ended in the Crimean
War, and it was feared that in the event of hostilities
breaking out, the zeal of the officers for their country
might tempt them to transcend their peaceful occupa-
tion. The instructions with regard to this ran as
follows :

"In the eveut of this country being involved in hostilities
during your absence, you will take care never to be surprised ;
but you are to refrain from any act of aggression towards the
vessels or settlements of any nation with which we may be at
war, as expeditions employed on behalf of discovery and science
have always been considered by all civilised communities as
acting under a general safeguard."

The great scientific expeditions sent out in recent
times by the governments of Britain, Germany, and the

Ship Rations 15

United States, were fitted with ev^ery convenience for
the staff of naturalists, and the luxuries and comforts
of civilisation attended them round the world. The
late Professor Mosely, for instance, who was a naturalist
on the English Challenger expedition, told the pre-
sent writer of a pleasant way in which a peculiarity of
the deep sea was made to pay toll to the comfort of
those on board ship. The great ocean depths all over
the world, under the burning skies of the tropics, or
below the arctic ice-fields, are extremely cold, the
water at the bottom always being only a few degrees
above freezing-point. When the dredge brought up a
sample of the abysmal mud at a convenient time, it was
used to ice the wine for the officers' mess. There was,
however, no cooled champagne for Huxley.

" Life ou board Her Majesty's ships in those days," he writes,
" was a very different affair from what it is now, and ours was
exceptionally rough, as we were often many months without
receiving letters or seeing any civilised people but ourselves. In
exchange, we had the interest of being about the latest voyagers,
I suppose, to whom it could be possible to meet with people who
knew nothing of fire-arms — as we did on the south coast of New
Guinea — and of making acquaintances with a variety of interest-
ing savage and semi-civilised people. But apart from experi-
ence of this kind, and the opportunities offered for scientific
work, to me personally the cruise was extremely valuable. It
was good for me to live under sharp discipline ; to be down on
the realities of existence by living on bare necessities ; to find
out how extremely well worth living life seemed to be when one
woke up from a night's rest on a soft plank with the sky for
canopy, and cocoa and weevilly biscuit the sole prospect for
breakfast ; and more especially to learn to work for the sake of
what I got for myself out of it, even if it all went to the bottom
and I myself along with it. My brother officers were as good
fellows as sailors ought to be, and generally are, but naturally
they neither knew nor cared anything about my pursuits, nor

i6 Thomas Henry Huxley

understood why I should be so zealous in pursuit of the objects
which my friends the middies christened 'Buffons,' after the
title conspicuous on a volume of the Suites d. Buffon which
stood on my shelf in the chart-room."

Huxley was only the surgeon on board the Rattle-
snake, and his pursuit of natural history was his own
affair. There was a special naturalist appointed to the
expedition, no doubt chosen because four years earlier,
as assistant to Professor Jukes, he had been attached
as naturalist to the expedition of the Fly in the same
waters. His name was John MacGillivray, and he was
the son of an exceedingly able naturalist whose reputa-
tion has been overshadowed by the greater names of
the middle century. William MacGillivray, the father,
sometime professor at the University of Aberdeen, was
one of those driven by an almost instinctive desire to
the study of nature. In his youth, when he was a poor
lad, desiring to see as much as possible of his native
land, and above all to visit the great museums and
libraries of the south, he walked from Aberdeen to
London with no luggage but a copy of Smith's Flora
Britannica. He was an ardent botanist, a collector of
insects and molluscs, and one of the pioneers in the
anatomy of birds. There are many curious allusions
in his writings which seem to shew that he too was be-
ginning to doubt the fixity of species, and to guess at
the struggle for existence and survival of the fittest
which the great Darwin was the first to make a part of
the knowledge of the world. It must be confessed that
his son John, the companion of Huxley, had little of
his father's ability. He was three years older than
Huxley, and broke off his medical course at the Uni-
versity of PMinburgh to sail in the Fly. After the re-
turn of the Rattlesnake, he was appointed in 1852 as

MacGillivray 17

naturalist to H.M.S. Herald, then starting under Cap-
tain Den ham for surveying work round the shores of
South America. He left that ship at Sydne}', and after
many years' wandering about the southern seas, ac-
counts of which he communicated from time to time to
Sydney newspapers, he died in 1867. He was a zealous
collector of plants and animals, but apparently cared
little for the study of his captures, either in life, in re-
lation to their surroundings, like Darwin, or for the
structure of their bodies, like Huxley. The somewhat
unpleasing nature of his regard for animals appears in
the following story which he himself tells :

" While at dinner off Daniley Island near the Torres .Straits,
news was brought that Dzuiu was under the stern in a canoe,
shouting out loudly for Dzoka (MacGillivray's native name),
and, on going up I found that he had brought off the barit,
which after a deal of trouble I struck a bargain for and ob-
tained. It was a very fine specimen of Cuscus Maculatus, quite
tame and kept in a large cage of split bamboo. Dzum seemed
very unwilling to part with the animal, and repeatedly enjoined
me to take great care of it and feed it well, which to please him
I promised to do, although I valued it merely for its skin, and
was resolved to kill it for that purpose at my first convenience."

On the other hand, MacGillivray paid great attention
to native languages, and collected vocabularies of some
value. To him was entrusted the task of writing an
account of the voyage, and it is from his rather dull
pages, brightened by illustrations from Huxley's
sketches, that the incidents of the voyage are taken.
The references to Huxley in the narrative are slight,
and seem to shew that no great intimacy existed be-
tween the two young men, the one a naturalist by pro-
fession, the other as yet a surgeon, but more devoted to
natural history than the naturalist. Such references

1 8 Thomas Henry Huxley

as occur relate to Huxley's constant occupations on
shore, sketching natives and their dwellings, and his
apparatus on board for trawling, dredging, and dis-
secting.

The voj^age out was uneventful. The ship touched
at Madeira and at Rio de Janeiro, and then crossed the
South Atlantic to Simon's Town at the Cape of Good
Hope, where the first quantity of treasure was to be
landed. There they found the colony distressed by the
long continuance of the Kaffir war. Prices for every-
thing were extortionate, and the colonists had no mind
for an}' affairs than their own, so after a short stay the
voyagers were glad to set out for the Mauritius. That
island, although in the possession of Britain, still re-
tained a strong impress of its French occupation, and
the travellers were interested by the mixture of popul-
ation inhabiting it.*

'&

" Passing through the closely packed lines of shipping, and
landing as a stranger at Port Louis, perhaps the first thing to
engage attention is the strange mixture of nations, — repre-
sentatives, he might at first be inclined to imagine, of half the
countries of the earth. He stares at a coolie from Madras with
a breech-cloth and a soldier's jacket, or a stately bearded Moor
striking a bargain with a Parsee merchant. A Chinaman with
two bundles slung on a bamboo hurries past, jostling a group
of young Creole exquisites smoking their cheroots at a corner,
and talking of last night's Norma, or the programme of the
evening's performance at the Hippodrome in the Champ de
Mars. His eye next catches a couple of sailors reeling out of a
grogshop, to the amusement of a group of laughing negresses,
in white muslin dresses of the latest Parisian fashion, contrast-
ing strongly wnth a modestly attired Cingalese woman, and an
Indian ayah with her young charge. Amidst all this, the

* Narrative of the Voyage of H. M. S. '' RattlcsJiake;' by John
MacGillivray, F.R.G.S. 2 vols. T. W. Boone, London, 1852.

Stay in Sydney 19

French language prevails ; and everything more or less per-
tains of the French character, and an Englishman can scarcely
believe that he is in one of the colonies of his own country."

From Mauritius they proceeded to the English-look-
ing colony of Tasmania, and after a few days set out
for Sydney, arriving there on July i6th. The survey-
ing officers had tedious work to do there, and Huxley
stayed in Sydney for three months. Then, and in the
course of three other prolonged stays in that town dur-
ing the expedition, Huxle}^ entered into the society of
the town and became a general favourite. He is still
remembered there, and the accompanying illustration *
is a copy of an original sketch of himself, now in the
possession of an Australian lady. He drew it on the
fly-leaf of a volume of Lytton's poems and presented it
on her birthday to the little daughter of a friend. At
Sydney, too, he met and gained the love of the lady,
then Miss Henrietta A. Heathorn, who afterwards be-
came his wife.

On October nth the Rattlesnake sailed northwards
to begin the real work of the expedition. The great
island of New Guinea, lying to the north of Australia,
is separated from it only by the comparatively narrow
Torres Straits. Through these lies the natural route
for the commerce between Australia and the Northern
Hemisphere. The eastward prolongation of New
Guinea, and the coast of Queensland, enclose between
them a great tropical sea which gradually converges
to the Straits. The waters are very tempestuous, and
the navigation is made more dangerous by the thou-
sands of coral islands and coral reefs that stud the

* This sketch was reproduced and described in Natural
Science, vol. vii., p. 381, and is now reproduced here by the
courtesy of the proprietors.

20 Thomas Henry Huxley

ocean. Following the shoreline of Oueensland, at a
distance of from ten to one hundred and fifty miles,
and stretching for twelve hundred and fift}' miles, is
the Great Barrier Reef of Australia, one of the wonders
of the world. The shelving floor of the ocean rises
nearly to the surface along this line, and vast colonies
of coral-building creatures have formed their reefs up
to the water's edge along the ridge. The turbulent
waves scouring over this living mass have carved and
moulded it into millions of fantastic islands, sometimes
heaping detached masses of dead debris high above the
surface of the water. At low tide the most w^onderful
fields of the animal flowers of the sea are exposed.
Some of them form branching systems of hard skeletons
like stony trees, the soft, brightly coloured animals
dotted over the stems like buds. Others form solid
masses ; others, again, rounded skull-like boulders, or
elevations like toadstools. The colours of the skeletons
and the animals are vivid scarlets and purples and
greens. Sea-anemones, shell- fish, and starfish of the
most vivid hues are as abundant as the corals. Bril-
liant fish dart through the blossoms of the marine
gardens, and sea-birds scream and wheel in the air.
The whole region is a paradise for the naturalist.
Along the seaward side of the reef the great ocean
surges and thunders perpetually. Between it and the
shore the quiet channel glows luider the tropical skies.
It was amid such scenes as these that the Rattlesnake
moved for nearly four years in the slow work of taking
soundings, fixing the exact position of channels through
the outer reef by slow triangular measurements, and
generally preparing for the safety of the commerce of
all nations. The ship went first up to Port Curtis in
Brisbane ; then fetched back to Sydney. Its next trip

Course of Voyage 21

was south to the strait between Tasmania and Aus-
tralic, then back to Sydney ; then again along the
Barrier Reef right up to the Torres Straits. After
work there, it returned again to Sydney, and then set
out for the Louisiade Archipelago, which stretches
through the coral sea south-eastwartl from New Guinea;
then again to the Australian shores of the Torres
Straits, and finally arrived in Sydney in March, 1850,
where the Captain suddenly died, and the ship was
ordered to return to England.

Throughout the voyage MacGillivray and Huxlej^
busied themselves with collecting animals on sea and on
shore. MacGillivray seems to have taken for his share
of the spoil chiefly such animals as provided shells or
skins or skeletons suitable for handing over to museums.
Huxley occupied himself incessantly with dissecting
tools and with the micro.scope, with results to be de-
scribed in a later chapter. The better-equipped expe-
ditions of modern times were provided with elaborate
appliances for bringing up samples of living creatures
from all depths of the floor of the ocean, and with com-
plicated towing nets for securing the floating creatures
of the surface of the seas. The Rattlesjiake naturalists
had to content themselves with simple apparatus de-
vised by themselves. At an early period of the voyage
attempts were made to take deep soundings, but no
bottom was reached at a depth of two thousand four
hundred fathoms, and their later work was confined to
surface animals or to inshore dredging in shallow
waters. They began near Rio.

" None of the ship's boats could be spared, so I [MacGillivray]
hired one pulled by four negro slaves who, although strong,
active fellows, had great objections to straining their backs at
the oar, when the dredge was down. No sieve having been

2 2 Thomas Henry Huxley

supplied, we were obliged to sift the contents of the dredge
through our hauds — a tedious and superficial mode of examina-
tion. Two days after, Mr. Huxley and I set to work in Bota-
fogo Bay, provided with a wire-gauze meat-cover and a curious
machine for cleaning rice ; these answered capitally as sub-
stitutes for sieves, and enabled us, by a thorough examination
of the contents of the dredge, to detect some forty-five species
of Mollusca and Radiata, some of which were new to science."

By " new to science" MacGillivray meant no more
than that the particular genera and species had not
been capttired before. Huxle}^ by his anatomical
work, showed many of the most famiHar creatures in a
light " new to science," by revealing their true struct-
ure and relationships.

"Among the acquisitions," MacGillivray goes on, "I may
mention a new species of Amphioxus, a genus of small fishes
exhibiting more anomalies than any other known to Ichthyolo-
gists, and the lowest organisation found in the class. It some-
what resembles the sand-eels of Britain in habits, like them
moving with extraordinary rapidity through the sand. By
dint of bribery and ridicule we had at length managed to get
our boatmen to work tolerably well, and when we were alike
well-roasted by the sun and repeatedly drenched, besides being
tired out and hungry, they had become quite submissive, and
exchanged their grumbling for merriment."

The towing net repeatedly produced a rich harvest. It
was constructed by themselves, and consisted of a bag
of the bunting used for flags, two feet deep, the mouth
being sewn round a wooden hoop fourteen inches in
diameter ; three pieces of cord, a foot and a half long,
were secured to the hoop at eqtial intervals and had
their ends tied together. This net was towed behind
the ship by a stout cord. The water passed through
the meshes of the cloth and left behind in the pocket
any small floating animals.

Primitive Races 23

Excursions ashore to the little savage islands or to
the mainland were a source of constant interest, and it
cannot be doubted that the acquaintance Huxlej' thus
gained with many of the ver)^ low savages of Australia
and New Guinea prepared his mind for the revolution-
ary doctrine of descent which he embraced a few years
later. At the present time, there are probably very
few parts of earth where there are yet to be found
savages unaltered by civilisation. Some of the low
races with which Huxley came in contact are now ex-
tinct. All the survivors have come in contact with
white races, and their habits and customs have been
altered. Before long the total extinction of these lower
races is to be expected, and there will then be left an
enormous gap between the lower animals and the domi-
nant, aggressive, yellow and w'hite races which are
spreading over the earth and making the lower races
perish before them, as the smaller but more cunning
European rat has exterminated the native brown rat of
Australia. In their various excursions upon the Aus-
tralian mainland they had no trouble of any kind with
the natives. These were at first suspicious of the doings
of the white men, and their total ignorance of the use of
firearms tempted them to rashness; but a few friendly
gifts, and the exercise of tact in negotiating exchanges
with them, made all the encounters pass off pleasantly.
On the other hand, in the Louisiade Archipelago, where
the savages were of a higher type, difficulties constantly
occurred. On one occasion, in a bay on the south side
of Joannet Island the party was attacked.

' ' In the grey of the morning the look-outs reported the ap-
proach of three canoes with about ten men in each. On two
or three persons shewing themselves in the bow of the pinnace,
in front of the rain awning, the natives ceased paddling, as if

24 Thomas Henry Huxley

baulked in their design of surprising the large boat ; but, after
a short consultation, they came alongside in their usual noisy
manner. After a stay of about live minutes otdy they pushed
off to the galley, aud some more sham bartering was attempted,
but they had nothing to give iu exchange for the wares they so
much coveted. In a short time the rudeness and overbearing
insolence of the natives bad risen to a pitch which left no
doubt of their hostile intentions. The anchor was got up,
when some of the blacks seized the painter, and others, in try-
ing to capsize the boat, brought the gunwale down to the
water's edge, at the same time grappling with the men to pull
them out, and dragging the galley inshore towards the shoal-
water. The bowman, with the anchor in his baud, was struck
on the head with a stone-headed axe. The blow was repeated,
but fortunately took effect only on the wash-streak. Another
of the crew was struck at with a similar weapon, but warded
off the blow, although held fast by one arm, when, just as the
savage was making another stroke. Lieutenant Dayman, who
up till now had exercised the utmost forbearance, fired at him
with a musket. The man did not drop, although wounded in
the thigh. But even this, unquestionably their first experience
of firearms, did not intimidate the natives, one of whom,
standing on a block of coral, threw a spear which passed across
the breast of one of the boat's crew aud lodged in the bend of
one arm, opening a vein. They raised a loud shout when the
spear was seen to take effect, and threw several others which
missed. Lieutenant Simpson, who had been watching what was
going on, then fired from the pinnace with buckshot and struck
them, when, finding that the large boat, though at anchor,
could assist the smaller one, the canoes were paddled inshore in
great haste and confusion. Some more musket shots were
fired, and the galley went in chase endeavouring to turn the
canoes, so as to bring them under fire of the pinnace's twelve-
pounder howitzer, which was speedily mounted and fired. The
shot either struck one of the canoes or went within a few inches
of the mark, on which the natives instantly jumped overboard
into the shallow water, making for the mangroves, which they
succeeded iu reaching, dragging their canoes with them. Two
rounds of grape-shot crashing through the branches dispersed
the party, but afterwards they moved two of the canoes out of

Native Treachery 25

sight. The remaining one was brought out after breakfast by
the galley under cover of the pinnace, and was towed off to
some distance. The paddles having been taken out and the
spears broken and left in her, she was let go to drift down
toward a village whence the attacking party were supposed to
have come. Some blood in this canoe, although not the one
most aimed at, showed that the firing had not been ineffective.
This act of deliberate treachery was perpetrated by persons
who had always been well treated by us, for several of the
natives present were recognised as having been alongside the
ship in Coral Haven. This, their first act of positive hostility,
affords, I think, conclusive evidence of the savage disposition
of the natives of this part of the Louisiade Archipelago when in-
cited by the hope of plunder, and shews that no confidence
should ever be reposed in them, unless, perhaps in the presence
of a numerically superior force, or in the close vicinity of a
ship. At the same time, the boldness of these savages in at-
tacking, with thirty men in three canoes, two boats known to
contain at least twenty persons — even in the hopes of taking
them by surprise — and in not being at once driven off upon
feeling the novel and deadly effects of firearms, shews no little
amount of bravery."

On their last visit to Cape York, in the extreme north
of Austraha, the party had the remarkable experience
of rescning a white woman from captivity among the
natives,

" In the afternoon some of our people on shore were surprised
to see a young white woman come up to claim their protection
from a party of natives from whom she had recently made her
escape, and who she thought would otherwise bring her back.
Of course she received every attention, and was taken on board
the ship by the first boat, when she told her story which is
briefly as follows : Her name is Barbara Thomson. She was
born at Aberdeen in Scotland, and, along with her parents, emi-
grated to New South Wales. About four years and a half ago
she left Moreton Bay with her husband in a small cutter, called
the America, of which he was the owner, for the purpose of
picking up some of the oil from the wreck of a whaler, lost on

26 Thomas Henry Huxley

the Bampton shoal, to which place one of her late crew under-
took to guide them ; their ultimate intention was to go on to
Port Essington. The man who acted as pilot was unable to
fiud the wreck, and after much quarreling on board in conse-
quence, and the loss of two men by drowning and of another
who was left on a small uninhabited island, they made their
way up to the Torres Straits, where, during a gale of wind their
vessel struck upon a reef on the eastern Prince of Wales Island.
The two remaining men were lost in attempting to swim on
shore through the surf, but the woman was afterwards rescued
by a party of natives on a turtling excursion, who, when the
gale subsided, swam on board and supported her on shore
between two of their number. One of these blacks, Boroto by
name, took possession of the woman as his share of the plun-
der ; she was compelled to live with him, but was well treated
by all the men, although many of the women, jealous of the
attention shewn her, for a long time evinced anything but
kindness. A curious circumstance secured for her the protec-
tion of one of the principal men of the tribe. This person, act-
ing upon the belief, universal throughout Australia and the
islands of the Torres Strait, so far as hitherto known, that white
people are the ghosts of the aborigines, fancied that in the
stranger he recognised a long-lost daughter, and at once ad-
mitted her into the relationship which he thought had formerly
subsisted between them. She was immediately acknowledged
by the whole tribe as one of themselves, thus securing an exten-
sive connection in relatives of all denominations. The head-
quarters of the tribe being on an island which all vessels passing
through the Torres Strait from the eastward must approach
within two or three miles, she had the mortification of seeing
from twenty to thirty or more ships go through every summer
without anchoring in the neighbourhood, so as to afford the
slightest opportunity of making her escape. Last year she
heard of our two vessels being at Cape York, only twenty miles
distant from some of the tribe who had communicated with us
and had been well treated, but they would not take her over
and watched her even more narrowly than before. On our
second and present visit, however, which the Cape York people
immediately announced by smoke signals to their friends, she
was successful in persuading some of her more immediate

Rescue of a White Woman 27

friends to bring her across to the mainland within a short dis-
tance of where the vessels lay. The blacks were credulous
enough to believe that as she had been so long with them and
had been so well treated, she did not intend to leave them, —
only ' she felt a strong desire to see the white people once more
and shake hands with them ' : adding that she would be certain
to purchase some axes, knives, tobacco, and other much-prized
articles."

Although the external adventures of the Rattlesnake
party were less varied and exciting than might have
been expected in a voyage of four years in the tropic
seas and among barbarian tribes, the mental adventures
through which Huxley passed in the time must have
been of the most surprising kind. It was a four-years'
course in the great university of nature, and when he
had finished it he was no longer a mere student, capri-
cious and unsettled in his mental tastes and inclinations,
but had set his face steadily towards his future life-
work. It is interesting to compare the importance in
Huxley's life of the Rattlesnake voyage with the im-
portance in Darwin's life of the voyage on the Beagle
undertaken some fifteen j^ears earlier. Huxley, when
he started, was a young surgeon with a taste of a vagtie
kind for dissecting and for drawing the peculiarities of
structure of different animals revealed by the knife and
the microscope. Day after day, month after month,
year after year, in the abundant leisure his slight pro-
fessional duties left him, he dissected and drew, dis-
sected and drew, animal after animal, as he got them
from the dredge or tow-net, or from the surface of the
coral reefs. He was not in any sense of the word a-
collecting naturalist. The identification and naming]
of species interested him little. What he cared for was,
he tells tis, " the architectural and engineering part of '
the business : the working out of the wonderful unity

28 Thomas Henry Huxley

of plan in the thousands and thousands of divers living
constructions, and the modifications of similar ap-
paratuses to serve different ends." And so, on the
Ratthsfiakc, and in his work in continuation of the
Rattlesnake investigations, — which occupied most of his
time for a few years after his return to London, — there
was gradually growing up in his mind a dim conception
of the animal kingdom as a group of creatures, not built
on half a dozen or more separate plans or types, each
unconnected with the other, but as a varied set of modi-
fications of a single type.

When Darwin set out on the Beagle, unlike Huxley,
he was an enthusiastic collecting naturalist. He had
wandered from county to county in England adding
new specimens to his collections of butterflies and
beetles. As the Beagle went round the world visiting
remote islands, far from land in the centre of the
waters, archipelagoes of islands crowding together,
islands hugging the shore of continents, and the great
continents of the old and new worlds, he continued to
collect and to classify. Gradually the resemblances
and differences between the creatures inhabiting differ-
ent parts of the earth began to strike him as exhibiting
an orderly plan. He saw that under apparently the
same conditions of food and temperature and moisture,
in different parts of the world the genera and species
were different, and that they were most alike in regions
between which there was the most recent chance of
migrations having taken place. In the quietness of
England, while Huxley was on the Rattlesnake, Darwin
was .slowly working towards the explanation of all he
had seen : towards the conception that animals and
plants had spread slowly from common centres, becom-
ing more and more different from each other as they

Darwin's Voyage

29

spread. He realised on his voyage that species had
come into existence by descent with modification, and
before long he was to publish to the world in the Origin
of Species a vast and convincing bulk of evidence as to
the actual fact of a common descent for all the different
existing organisms, and, in his theory of natural selec-
tion, a reasonable explanation of how the fact of evolu-
tion had come about. Darwin's greatest ally in bringing
the new idea before the world was Huxlej^, and Huxley
was teaching himself the absolute unity of the living
world. The two men were dissimilar in tastes and
temperament, and they were at work on quite different
sides of nature. When the time came, Huxley, with
his commanding knowledge of the structure of animals,
was ready to support Darwin and to illustrate and
amplify his arguments by a thousand anatomical proofs.
It is a curious and dramatic coincidence to realise that
both men learned their very different lessons under
very similar circumstances in the tropical seas of the
Southern Hemisphere.

CHAPTER III

FLOATING CREATUREvS OF THE SEA

The Nature of Floating Life — Memoir on Medusae Accepted
by the Royal Society — Old and New Ideas of the Animal
Kingdom — What Huxley Discovered in Medusae — His
Comparison of them with Vertebrate Embryos.

AS the Rattlesnake sailed through the tropical seas
Huxley came in contact with the very peculiar
and interesting inhabitants of the surface of the sea,
known now to naturalists as pelagic life or " plankton."
Although a poet has spoken of the " unvintageable
sea," all parts of the ocean surface teem with life.
Sometimes, as in high latittides, the cold is so great
that only the simplest microscopic forms are able to
maintain existence. In the tropics, animals and plants
are abundant, and sometimes by their numbers colour
great areas of water; or, as in the drift of the Giilf
Stream, make a tangle of animal and plant life through
which a boat travels only with difficulty. The basis of
the food-supply of this vast and hungry floating life is,
as on land, vegetable life ; for plants are the only creat-
ures capable of buildmg up food from the gases of the
air and the simple chemical salts found dissolved in
water. Occasionally, in shallow or warm seas, marine

30

Microscope at Sea 31

floating plants, large and visible like the sea-weeds of
the coast, form the floating masses known as Sargasso
seas ; more often the plants are minute, microscopic
specks visible only when a drop of water is placed under
the microscope, but occurring in incredible numbers,
and, like the green vegetation of the earth, forming the
ultimate food-supply of all the living things around
them. Innumerable animals, great and small, live on
the plants or upon their fellows, and, however far he
may be from land, the naturalist has always abundant
material got by his daily use of the tow-net. This
drifting population floats at the mercy of the waves.
Most of the animals are delicate, transparent creatures,
their transparency helping to protect them from the
attacks of hungry fellows. Nerves, muscles, skin,
and the organs generally are clear, pale, and hardly
visible. Such structures as the liver, the reproductive
organs, and the stomach, which cannot easily become
transparent, are grouped together into small knots,
coloured brown like little masses of sea-weed. Other
floating creatures are vividly coloured, but the hues are
bright blues and greens closely similar to the sparkling
tints of sea- water in sunlight. The different members
of this marine flotsam frequently rise and fall periodi-
cally: some of them sinking by day to escape the light,
others rising only by day ; others, again, appearing on
the surface in spring, keeping deep down in winter.
Perhaps the majority of them are phosphorescent, some-
times shining b}' their own light, sometimes borrowing
a glory from innumerable phosphorescent bacteria with
which they are infested. Nearly every class of the
animal kingdom contributes members to this strange
population. The j^oung forms of man}- fish, as for in-
stance of conger, flying gurnards, and some flatfish, are

32 Thomas Henry Huxley

pelagic and have colourless blood, and pale, transparent,
gelatinous or cartilaginous skeletons. The tadpole-
like stages of the sea-squirts, which in adult life are to
be found attached to rocks like weeds, drift about in
the surface waters until their time conies for settling
down in life. Man}' other Ascidians pass their whole
life as pelagic creatures. A few molluscs, many kinds of
worms, echinoderms, and their allies, crab and lobster-
like creatures in innumerable different stages of de-
velopment, are to be found there, while unnumbered
polyps and jelly-fish are always present. It would be
difficult to imagine a better training for the naturalist
than to spend j^ears, as Huxley did, working at this
varied assortment of living creatures. Huxley de-
clared that the difficulties of examining such flimsy
creatures had been exaggerated.

" At least, with a good liglit aud a good microscope, with the
ship tolerably stead\-, I never failed in procuring all the inform-
ation I required. The great matter is to obtain a good succes-
sive supply of specimens, as the more delicate oceanic species
are usually unfit for examination within a few hours after they
are taken."

Da}' after da}', as the Raitlcsnake crept from island to
island, Huxley examined the animals brought up by
his tow-net. He made endless dissections, and gradually
accumulated a large portfolio of drawings. Mtich of
the time he passed at Sydney was spent in libraries and
museums, comparing his own observations with the re-
corded observations of earlier workers, and receiving
from the combination of his own work and the .work of
others new ideas for his future investigations. It was
all entirely a labour of love ; it lay outside the profes-
sional duties by which he made his living, and for a

Royal Society Medals 33

long time it seemed as if he was not even to gain repu-
tation by the discoveries he knew himself to be making.
He writes in his autobiography :

"During the four years of our absence, I sent home commun-
ication after communication to the ' Linnaean ' Society, with
the same result as that obtained by Noah when he sent the
raven out of his ark. Tired at last of hearing nothing about
them, I determined to do or die, and in 1849 I drew up a more
elaborate paper and forwarded it to the Royal Society. This
was my dove, if I had only known it ; but owing to the move-
ments of the ship I heard nothing of that either until ni}- re-
turn to England in the latter end of the year 1850, when I
found that it was printed and published, and that a huge packet
of separate copies awaited me. When I hear some of my
young friends complain of want of sympathy and encourage-
ment, I am inclined to think that my naval life was not the
least valuable part of my education."

This first sticcessful paper was a memoir On the Anat-
omy and the Affinities of the Family of Mediisce, and was
sent at Captain Stanley's suggestion to that officer's
father, the Bishop of Norwich, who communicated it to
the Royal Society. It is a curious circumstance that
Huxley, who afterwards met with so virulent oppos-
ition from bishops, owed his first public success to
one of them. Professor Sir Michael Foster writes of
this period in Huxley's life :

"The career of many a successful man hasehewn that obsta-
cles often prove the mother of endeavour, and never was this
lesson clearer than in the case of Huxle3^ Working amidst a
host of ditfi cutties, in want of room, in want of light, seeking
to unravel the intricacies of minute structure with a microscope
lashed to secure steadiness, cramped within a tiny cabin, jos-
tled by the tumult of a crowded ship's life, with the scantiest
supply of books of reference, with no one at hand of whom he
could take counsel on the problems opening up before him, he
gathered for himself during these four years a large mass of

34 Thomas Henry Huxley

accurate, important, and in most cases novel, observations, and
illustrated them with skilful, pertinent drawini>;s. Even his in-
tellectual solitude had its good effects : it drove him to ponder
over the new facts which came before hiui, and all his observa-
tions were made alive with scientific thought."

Afterwards, in England, he received the Royal Medal
of the Royal Society for this memoir on Medusae, shar-
ing this supreme distinction of scientific England with
men so illustrious as Jotile, the discoverer of the relation
between force and heat, Stokes, the great investigator
of optical physics, and Humboldt, the traveller, all of
w^ioni received medals in the same year. In making
the presentation to Huxley, the Earl of Rosse, then
President of the Royal Society, declared :

" In those papers you have for the first time fully developed
their structure (that of the Medusae), and laid the foundation of
a rational theory for their classification. In your second
paper, on the anatomy of Salpa and Pyrosoma, the phenomena
have received the most ingenious and elaborate elucidations,
and have given rise to a process of reasoning, the results of
which can scarcely yet be anticipated, but must bear in a very
important degree upon some of the most abstruse points of
what may be called transcendental physiology."

Many reasons make it difficult for us to realise, now,
the singular novelty and importance of Huxley's
memoir on the Medusae. The first is a reason which
often prevents great discoveries in almost every stibject
from receiving in after years their due respect. The
years that have passed since 1850 have seen not only
the most amazing progress in our knowledge of com-
parative anatomy, but almost a revoUition in the
methods of studying it. Huxley's work has been in-
corporated in the very body of science. A large num-
ber of later investigators have advanced upon the lines
he laid down ; and just as the superstructures of a great

The Tree of Evolution 35

building conceal the foundations, so later anatomical
work, although it has only amplified and extended
Huxley's discoveries, has made them seem less striking
to the modern reader. The present writer, for instance,
learned all that he knows of anatomy in the last ten
years, and until he turned to it for the purpose of this
volume he had never referred to Huxley's original
paper. When he did so, he found from beginning to
end nothing that was new to him, nothing that was
strange : all the ideas in the memoir had passed into
the currency of knowledge and he had been taught
them as fundamental facts. It was only when he
turned to the text-books of anatomy and natural his-
tory current in Huxley's time that he was able to
realise how the conclusions of the young ship-surgeon
struck the Fellows and President of the Royal Society
as luminous and revolutionary ideas.

In the first half of the century, a conception of the
animal kingdom prevailed which was entirely different
from our modern ideas. We know now that all animals
are bound together by the bond of a common descent,
and we seek in anatomy a clue to the degrees of relation-
ship existing among the different animals we know. We
regard the animal kingdom as a thicket of branches all
springing from a common root. Some of these spring
straight up from the common root unconnected with
their fellows. Others branch repeatedly, and all the
branches of the same stem have features in common.
What we see in the living world is only the surface of
the thicket, the tops of the twigs; and it is by examina-
tion of the structure of this surface that we reconstruct
in imagination the whole system of branches, and know
that certain twigs, from their likeness, meet each other
a little way down ; that others are connected only very

36 Thomas I Icnry Huxley

deep down, and that others, aj^^ain, spring free ahnost
from the beginning. The fossils of beds of rock of
different geological ages give ns incomplete views of the
surface of the thicket of life, as it was in earlier times.
These views we have of the past aspects of the animal
kingdom are alwa3's much more incomplete than our
knowledge of the existing aspect; partly because many
animals, from the softness of their bodies, have left
either no fossil remains at all, or only very imperfect
casts of the external surfaces of their bodies ; and
partly because the turning of any animal into a fossil,
and its subsequent discovery by a geologist, are occa-
sional accidents ; but, although the evidence is much
less perfect than we could wish, there is enough of it
to convince anatomists that existing animals are all in
definite blood-relationship to each other, and to make
them, in the investigation of any new animal, study its
anatomy with the definite view of finding out its place
in the family tree of the living world.

When Huxley made his first discoveries, entirely
different ideas prevailed. The animal kingdom was
supposed to offer a series of types, of moulds, into which
the Creator at the beginning of the world had cast the
substance of life. These types were independent of
each other, and had been so since the beginning of
things. Anatomists were concerned chiefly with sys-
tematic work, with detecting and recording the slight
differences that existed among the numbers of animals
grouped around each type. No attempt was made to
see connection between tj-pe and tj-pe, for where
these had been separately created there was nothing
to connect them except possibly some idea in the
mind of the Creator, This apparentl)' barren atti-
tude to nature was stronger in men's minds because

Old Classifications 37

it had inspired the colossal achievements of Cuvier,
a genius who, under whatever misconceptions he
had worked, would have added great!}- to know-
ledge. As we have seen in the first chapter, Huxley,
through Wharton Jones, and through his own reading,
had been brought under the more modern German
thought of Johannes Mueller and Von Baer. He
had learned to stud}^ the problems of living nature
in the spirit of a physicist making investigations into
dead nature. In the anatomy of animals, as in the
structure of rocks and crystals, there were to be sought
out " laws of growth " and shaping and moulding in-
fluences which accounted for the form of the structures.
To use the technical term, he was a morphologist : one
who studied the architecture of animals not merely in
a spirit of admiring wonder, but with the definite idea
of finding out the guiding principles which had determ-
ined these shapes.

Not only was the prevailing method of investigation
faulty, but actual knowledge of a large part of the ani-
mal kingdom was extremely limited. In the minds of
most zoologists the animal kingdom was divided into
two great groups : the vertebrates and invertebrates.
The v^ertebrate, or back-boned, animals were well
known; comparatively speaking they are all built upon
the type of man ; and human anatomists, who indeed
made up the greater number of all anatomists, using
their exact knowledge of the human body, had studied
many other vertebrates with minute care, and, from
man to fishes, had arranged living vertebrates very
much in the modern order. But the invertebrates
were a vague and ill-assorted heap of animals. It was
not recognised that among them there were many series
of different grades of ascending complexity, and there

38 Thomas Henry Huxley

was no well-known form to serve as a standard of com-
parison for all the others in the fashion that the body
of man served as a standard of comparison for all
vertebrates. Here and there, a few salient tj^pes such
as insects and snails had been picked out, but know-
ledge of them helped but little with a great many of the
invertebrates. The great Linnaeus had divided the
animal kingdom into four groups of vertebrates : mam-
mals, birds, reptiles, and fishes, but for the invertebrates
he had done no more than to pick out the insects as
one group and to call everything else " Vermes" or
worms. The insects included all creatures possessed of
an external skeleton or hard skin divided into jointed
segments, and included forms so different as insects,
spiders, crabs, and lobsters. But Vermes included all
the members of the animal kingdom that were neither
vertebrates nor insects. Cuvier advanced a little. He
got rid of the comprehensive title Vermes — the label
of the rubbish-heap of zoologists. He divided animals
into four great subkingdoms : Vertebrates, Mollusca,
Articulata, Radiata. These names, however, only
covered very superficial resemblances among the ani-
mals designated by them. The word Mollusca only
meant that the creatures grouped together had soft
t)odies, unsupported by internal or external articulated
skeletons ; and this character, or, rather, absence of
character, was applied alike to many totally dissimilar
creatures. The term Articulata included not only
Linnaeus's insects but a number of soft-skinned, ap-
parently jointed, worm-like animals such as the leech
and earthworm. Lastly, tlie name Radiata meant no
more than that the organs of the creatures so desig-
nated were more or less disposed around a centre, as the
sepals and petals of a flower are grouped around the

Structure of Medusae 39

central pistil ; and it included animals so different as
the starfish and sea-anemones and Medusae. The
names used in the classification were not only loosely
applied but were based on the most superficial observ-
ation, and took no account of the intimate structures
""of the tissues and organs of the animals. With slight
modifications, due to individual taste or special know-
ledge of small groups, later writers had followed I^in-
nseus and Cuvier.

It was with a view of the animal kingdom not much
clearer than this that Huxley began his work on the
Medusae of the tropic seas. He began to study them
no doubt simply because they were among the most
abundant of the animals that could be obtained from
the ship. He made endless dissections and drawings,
and, above all, studied their minute anatomy with the
microscope. They were all placed among Cuvier' s
Radiata, but, as Huxley said in the first line of his
memoir :

"Perhaps no class of animals has been investigated with so
little satisfactory and comprehensive result, and this not for
the want of patience and ability on the part of the observers,
but rather because they have contented themselves with stating
matters of detail concerning particular genera and species, in-
stead of giving broad and general views of the whole class,
considered as organised upon a given type, and inquiring into
its relations with other families."

He found that fully developed Medusae consisted each
of a disc with tentacles and vesicular bodies at the
margins, a stomach, and canals proceeding from it, and
generative organs. He traced this simple common
structure through the complications and modifications
in which it appeared in the different groups of Medusae,
in all this work bringing out the prevailing features of

40 Thomas Menry Huxley

the anatomy in contrast to the individual peculiarities.
He shewed that microscopically all the complicated
systems of canals and organs were composed of two
" foundation-membranes," two thin webs of cells, one
of which formed the outermost layer of the body, while
the inner formed the lining of the stomach and canals
in the thinner parts of the body, such as the edges of
the umbrella-like disc, and towards the ends of the
tentacles. These thin webs formed practically all the
body. In the thicker parts there was interposed be-
tween them an almost structureless laj^er of jelly, placed
like padding between the lining and the cloth of a coat.
He shewed that blood-vessels and blood were absent,
in which he has been confirmed by all other observers.
He declared more doubtfully against the existence of a
special nervous system, and it was not until long after,
when the methods of microscopic investigation were
much more perfect, that the delicate nerve-cells and
nerve-fibres, which we now know to exist, were dis-
covered.

Having thus shewn the peculiar organisation of the
group he turned to seek out its allies among other
families. The Medusae consisted essentially of two
membranes inclosing a variously shaped cavity inas-
much as all its organs were so composed. The gener-
ative organs were external, being variously developed
processes of the two membranes. The peculiar organs
called thread-cells — poisoned darts by the discharge of
which prey could be paralysed — were universally pre-
sent. What other families presented these peculiarities ?

There are to be found abundantly in sea-water, and
less frequently in fresh water, innumerable forms of
animal life called Zoophytes or animal plants because
they occur as encrusting masses like lichens, or

Allies of Medusse 41

branched forests like moss, on the surface of stones
and shells. A common habit gave this set of creatures
their common name; but, although they were grouped
together, there was no greater affinity among them
than there is racial affinity among people who clothe
themselves for an evening party in the same conven-
tional dress. Huxley examined a large number of
these, and picked out from them two great families of
polyps, the Hydroid and Sertularian polyps, which
each consist of colonies of creatures very much like
the little fresh-water h^alra. He shewed that the
tubular body of these and the ring of tentacles sur-
rounding the mouth were composed of the same two
foundation-membranes of which all the organs of
Medusae are composed. He found in them the poisoned
arrows or thread-cells of the Medusae, and the same ex-
ternal position of the reproductive organs. And, lastly,
he separated from all other creatures, and a.ssociated
with his new group, some of the strangest and most
beautiful animals of the tropic seas, known to science
as the Physophoridae and the Diphyidae. The best-
known of these is the " Portuguese man-of-war," the
body of which consists of a large pear-shaped vesicle
which floats on the water like a bladder. From the
lower part of this depend into the water large and
small nutritive branches, each ending in a mouth
surrounded by a circle of waving tentacles armed with
batteries of thread-cells, while another set of hanging
protrusions bear the grape-like reproductive organs.
On the upper surface of the bladder is fixed a purple
sail of the most brilliant colour, b}' which the floating
creature is blown through the water. When the
weather is rough, the bladder empties, and the creat-
ure sinks down into the quiet water below the waves.

42 Thomas Henry Huxley

to rise again when the storm is over. This, and its
equall}' wonderful alHes, Huxley showed to be a com-
plicated colon\' of hydra-like creatures, each part being
composed of two membranes, and therefore essentially
similar to Medusae. Thus, by a great piece of con-
structive work, an assemblage of animals was gathered
into a new group and shewn to be organised upon one
simple and uniform plan, and, even in the most com-
plex and aberrant forms, reducible to the same type.
The group, and Huxley's conception of its structure,
are now absolutely accepted by anatomists, and have
made one of the corner-stones of our modern idea of
the arrangement of the animal kingdom. With the
exception of sponges, concerning the exact relations of
which there is still dispute, and of a few sets of para-
sitic and possibly degenerate creatures, all animals, the
bodies of which are multicellular, from the simple
fresh-water hydra up to man, are divided into two great
groups. The structure of the simpler of these groups
is exactly what Huxley found to be of importance in
the Medusae. The body wall, from which all the organs
protrude, consists merely of a web of cells arranged in
two sheets or membranes, and the single cavity con-
sists of a central stomach, surrounded by these mem-
branes, the cavity remaining simple or giving rise to a
number of branching canals. The members of this
great division of the animal kingdom are the creatures
which Huxley selected and placed together, with the
addition of the sea-anemones and the medusa-like
Ctenophora, which, indeed, he mentioned in his me-
moir as being related to the others, but reserved fuller
consideration for a future occasion. This group is
now called the Coelenterata, the name implying that
the creatures are simply hollow stomachs, and it is

Vertebrate Embryos and Medusae 43

contrasted in the strongest way with the group Ccelom-
ata, in which are placed all the higher animals, from the
simplest worm up to man ; animals in which, in addi-
tion to the two foundation-membranes of the Coelen-
terata, there is a third foundation-membrane, and in
which, in addition to the simple stomach cavit}- with
its offshoots, there is a true bod5'-cavity or coelome, and
usually a set of spaces and channels containing a blood-
fluid. The older method of naming groups of animals
after some obvious superficial character lingered on for
some years in text-books and treatises, but in this
memoir the young ship-surgeon had replaced it by the
modern scientific method of grouping animals together
onl}' because of real identity of structure.

There is yet left to be noticed perhaps the most won-
derful of all the ideas in this first memoir by Huxley.
In the course of describing the two foundation mem-
branes of the Medusae he remarks:

"It is curious to remark, that throughout, the outer and
inner membranes appear to bear the same physiological rela-
tion to one another as do the serous and mucous layers of the
germ : the outer becoming developed into the muscular system,
and giving rise to the organs of offence and defence : the inner
on the other hand appearing to be more closely subservient to
the purposes of nutrition and generation."

In the whole range of science it would be difficult to
select an utterance more prophetic of future knowledge
than these few words. Huxley had been reading the
investigations of Von Baer into the early development
of back-boned animals. He had learned from them the
great generalisation, that the younger stages of these
animals resemble one another more closely than the
adult stages, and that in an early stage in the develop-
ment of all these animals the beginning of the embryo

44 Thomas Henry Huxley

consists of two layers of cells, in fact of two foundation-
membranes, one forming specially the wall of the future
digestive canal, the other forming the most external
portion of the future animal. In these days nothing
could have seemed a remoter or more unlikely com-
parison than one instituted between Medusas and the
embryonic stages of back-boned animals. But Huxley
made it, not allowing the evidence brought before his
reason to be swamped by preconceived ideas. At the
time he did no more than to make the comparison. It
was much later that the full importance of it became
known, when more extended work on the embryolog}-
of vertebrates and of the different groups of the inverte-
brates had made it plain that the two foundation-mem-
branes of Huxley occur in all animals from the Medusae
up to man. In the group of Coelenterata the organisa-
tion remains throughout life as nothing more than a
folding in and folding out of these membranes. The
early stages of all the higher animals similarly consist
of complications of the two membranes; but later on
there is added to them a third membrane. Thus the
group that Huxley gathered together comprises those
animals that as adults remain in a condition of devel-
opment which is passed through in the embryonic life
of all higher animals. The immense importance of
this conclusion becomes plain, and the conclusion itself
seems obvious, when seen in the light of the doctrine
of descent. The group of Ccelenterata represents a sur-
viving, older condition in the evolution of animals.
Huxley himself, when on the Rattlesnake, regarded
evolution only as a vague metaphysical dream, and he
made the comparison which has been described without
any afterthought of what it implied. In this we have
the earliest authentic instance of the peculiar integrity

Vertebrate Embryos and Medusae 45

of mind which was so characteristic of him in his deal-
ings with philosophy and tradition. He never allowed
any weight of authorit}'- or any apparent disturbance of
existing ideas to alter the conclusions to which his
reason led him. This intellectual courage made him
fitted to be the leader in the battle for evolution and
against traditional thought, and we shall find again
and again in consideration of his work that it was the
keynote of his life.

CHAPTER IV

EARLY DAYS IN LONDON

Scientific Work as Unattached Ship-Surgeon — Introduction to
London Scientific Society — Translating, Reviewing, and
Lecturing — Ascidians — Molluscs and the Archetype —
Criticism of Pre-Darwinian Evolution — Appointment to
Geological Survey.

THE Rattlesnake was paid off at Chatham on No-
vember 9, 1850. In the natural course of events
Huxley would have been appointed before long to
active service upon another ship. But he had no inten-
tion of relapsing into the position of a mere navy doc-
tor ; he had accumulated sufficient scientific material
to keep him employed on scientific investigation for
years, and so he applied to the Admiralty to " be borne
on the books" of H.M.S. Fisgard at Woolwich, —
that is to say, to be appointed assistant-surgeon to the
ship " for particular service," so that he should not be
compelled to live on board, but might remain in town,
and, with free access to libraries and museums, work
up the observations he had made on the Rattlesnake
into serious and substantial contributions to science.
His request was granted, largely' b}- the aid of his old
chief, Sir W. Burnett, who continued to take the most
useful interest in the young man he had originally

46

Candidate for Posts 47

nominated to the service. In a letter to hira Huxley-
described the investigations which he desired to con-
tinue as being chiefly those on " the anatomy of certain
Gasteropod and Pteropod Mollusca, of Firola and At-
lantis, of Salpa and Pyrosoma, of two new Ascidians,
namely, Appendicularia and Doliolum, of Sagitta and
certain Annelids, of the auditory and circulatory organs
of certain transparent Crustacea, and of the Medusae
and Polyps." His request was granted, and for the
next three years Huxley lived in London with his
brother, on the exiguous income of an assistant-sur-
geon, and devoted himself to research. He became
almost at once of the first rank among English anato-
mists. The result of the paper on Medusae in the Trans-
actions of the Royal Society was that he was elected a
Fellow of the Society on June 5, 185 1, and a year later
received a Royal Medal of the Society. He made many
warm friendships both among the older and the younger
generations of scientific men. In his obituary notice
of Huxley, Sir Michael Foster wrote:

" By Edward Forbes, in whose nature there was much that
was akin to his own, and with whom he had some acquaint-
ance before his voyage, he was at once greeted as a comrade,
and with Joseph Dalton Hooker, to whom he was drawn at the
very first by their common experience as navy surgeons, he
began an attachment which, strengthened by like biological
aspirations, grew closer as their lives went on. In the first
year after his return, in the autumn of 1851, he made the ac-
quaintance of John Tyndall at the meeting of the British Asso-
ciation at Ipswich, and the three. Hooker, Huxley, and Tyndall,
finding how much in common were all their scientific views
and desires, formed then and there a triple scientific alliance."

Repeated efforts were made by these three, and by more
influential friends, to induce the Admiralty to contrib-
ute to the expense of publishing Huxley's scientific

48 Thomas Henry Huxley

results, as they had given a pledge to encourage officers
who had done scientific work. These efforts lasted
unavailingly for nearly three years, and then, as Hux-
ley says : "The Admiralty, getting tired, I suppose,
cut short the discussion b}- ordering me to join a ship,
which thing I declined to do, and, as Rastignac, in the
Pere Goriot, says to Paris, I said to London, a nous
dciixy This light phrase conceals a courageous and
momentous decision. He was absolutelj^ without pri-
vate resources, and having abandoned his professional
work he had no salary of any kind. For a year or so
he supported himself by writing reviews and popular
scientific articles, striving all the time not only to gain
his bread but to continue his scientific work and make
it known to the public. He desired to get a professor-
ship of physiology or of comparative anatomy, and as
vacancies occurred he applied, but unsuccessfully. At
the same time, he tells us, he and his friend, John Tyn-
dall, were

"candidates, tie for the Chair of Physics, and I for that of
Natural History in the University of Toronto, which, fortu-
nately, as it turned out, woukl not look at either of us. I say
fortunately, not from any lack of respect for the University of
Toronto ; but because I soon made up my mind that London
was the place for me, and hence I have steadily declined the
inducements to leave it which have at various times been
offered."

In these early years in Ivondon Huxley's work was
most varied. A large number of anonymous articles
by him appeared in the Literary Gazette, and in other
periodicals. He assisted to remove the insular narrow-
ness from English scientific work by translating many
foreign memoirs. With the collaboration of Mr. Hen-
frey, he edited a series of scientific memoirs, all of

Individuality 49

which were translated from foreign languages, and
man}' by his own pen. With the assistance of Mr.
George Busk he made a translation of Kolliker's His-
tology, a great treatise on microscopic anatomy which
played a large part in the development of the modern
English schools of anatomy and physiology. He made
some valuable contributions to Todd and Bowman's
Cyclopaedia of Anatofuy, an elaborate publication now
nearl}' forgotten and practically superseded, but which
was the standard anatomical work of the middle of this
century. He was unable to progress rapidly with his
work upon oceanic Medusas, as he was uncertain how
to have it published ; the Admiralty refused to assist,
and it was too lengthy for publication in the volumes
of the learned Societies. As a matter of fact, he did not
publish it until 1858, when it appeared as a separate
memoir. To the Quarterly Journal of Microscopical
Science and to the Transactions of the Royal and Liiince an
Societies he contributed a large number of memoirs
dealing with the microscopic anatomy and relation-
ships of invertebrates, and, lastl}', he gave a series of
addresses at the Royal Institution, which had been
founded as a means by which leading men of science
might give accounts of their work to London society.
Abstracts of these lectures are published in the early
volumes of the Proceedings of the Royal Instifnfion and
are interesting as shewing the kinds of zoological sub-
jects which were attracting the attention of Huxley
and which he considered of sufficient interest and im-
portance to bring to the notice of the general public.
The first of these lectures, and probably the first given
in public by Huxley, occurred on April 30, 1852, and
was entitled " Animal Individuality." The problem as

to what is meant by an individual had been raised in
4

50 Thomas Henry Huxley

his mind b}- consideration of many of the forms of
marine life, notably compound structures like the Por-
tuguese man-of-war, and creatures like the salps, which
form floating chains often many yards in length. He
explained that the word individual covers at least three
quite different kinds of conceptions. There is, first,
what he described as arbitrary individuality, an indi-
viduality which is given by the mind of the observer
and does not actually exist in the thing considered.
Thus a landscape is in a sense an individual thing, but
only so far as it is a particular part of the surface of
the earth, isolated for the time in the mind of the per-
son looking at it. If the observer shift his position,
the range of the landscape alters and becomes some-
thing else. Next there are material, or practicall}'
accidental individual things, such as crystals or pieces
of stone; and, lastly, there are living individuals which,
as he pointed out, were cycles. All living things are
born into the world, grow up, and die, and it was to
the cycle of life, from the &%% to the adult which pro-
duces eggs, that he gave the name individual. In a
simple animal like Hydra there is no diflSculty in accept-
ing this plain definition of individuality; but Huxley
went on to compare with Hydra a compound creature
like the Portuguese man-of-war, which really is com-
posed of a colony of Hydra-like creatures, the different
members of the colony being more or less altered to
serve different functions. All these have come from
the branching of a single simple creature produced from
an ^g%, and to the whole colony Huxley gave the
name of zoological individual. The salps give a still
wider interpretation to this view of individuality. The
original salp produced from the 0.%^ gives rise to many
salps, which may either remain attached in a chain, or,

Individuality 51

breaking away from one another, may live separately.
Huxley extended the use of the word individual so as
to include as a single zoological individual the whole
set of creatures cohering in chains or breaking apart,
which had been produced by budding from the product
of a single egg-cell. This subtle analysis of ideas de-
lighted and interested his contemporaries, and the train
of logical examination of what is meant by individu-
ality has persisted to the present time. Like all other
zoological ideas, this has been considerably altered by
the conception of evolution. Zoologists no longer
attempt to stretch logical conceptions until they fit
enormous and different parts of the living world. They
recognise that the living world, because it is alive, is
constantly changing, and that living things pass
through different stages or kinds of individuality in
the course of their lives. A single egg-cell is one
kind, perhaps the simplest kind, of zoological indi-
vidual ; when it has grown up into a simple polyp it
has passed into a second grade of individuality; when,
by budding, the polyp has become branched, a third
grade is reached, and when the branches have become
different, in obedience to the different purposes which
they are to serve in the whole compound creature, a
still further grade is reached. Huxley's attempt to
find a meaning for individuality that would appl}'
equally to a single simple creature, to a compound
creature, and to the large number of separate creatures,
all developed by budding from one creature, is a strik-
ing instance of his singular capacity for bringing ap-
parently dissimilar facts into harmony, by finding out
the common underlying principle, and, although we no
longer accept this particular conclusion, we cannot fail
to notice in it the peculiar powers of his mind.

52 Thomas Henry Huxley

A second and even more interesting Royal Institution
lecture dealt with the " Identit}^ of Structure in Ani-
mals and Plants." At the present time every educated
person knows that the life of animals and plants alike
depends on the fact that their bodies are composed of a
living material called protoplasm, a material which is
identical in every important respect in both kingdoms
of the living world. In the early fifties, scientific
opinion was by no means clear on this matter, and
certainly public opinion was most vague. Huxley dis-
cussed what w^as meant by organisation, and shewed
that in every essential respect plants and animals alike
were organised beings. Then he went on to explain
the cellular theor}' of Schwann, which was then a nov-
elty to a general audience. Schwann, in studying the
microscopic structure of plants, noticed that their bodies
were made up of little cases with firm walls ; these he
called cells, and declared that the whole bod}^ of the
plant was composed of cells. As the walls of these
cells were the most obvious and visible feature, it was
supposed that they were the most essential part of the
structure, and there was some difficulty in applying
the cellular theory to the bodies of animals, as in most
cases there are no easily visible cell-walls in animal tis-
sues. As the result of his own observation, and from
his reading of the work of others, Huxley laid down
in the clearest way what is now accepted by ever3'one
— that the presence of walls is of minor importance,
and that it is the slimy contents of the cells, what is
called " protoplasm," that is the important element.
He declared that the protoplasm of animals was iden-
tical with the protoplasm of plants, and that plants were
" animals confined in wooden cases." He agreed with
Schwann that the cell, using the term to imply the

Alternation of Generations 53

contents rather than the wall, was of fundamental im-
portance, and was the unit of structure of the whole
world of life. On the other hand, he declared that it
could not be looked at as the unit of function : he denied
that the powers and properties of a living body were
simply the sum of the powers and properties of the
single cells. In this opinion he was not followed by
physiologists until quite recently. For many years
physiologists held that cells were units of function just
as much as they are units of structure ; but in the last
ten years there has been a strong return to the opinion
of Huxley.

In 1 85 1 two v^ery important memoirs were published
in the Transactions of the Royal Society, which contained
the results of Huxley's observations of the interesting
animals known as " tunicates." The first of these
papers begins as follows :

"The Salpie, tliose strano^e gelatinous animals, through
masses of which the voyager iu the great ocean sometimes sails
day after day, have been the subject of a great controversy since
the time of the publication of the celebrated work of Chaniisso,
De Ani}iialibiis Quibusdam e Classe Vermium Linnceana. In
this work there were set forth, for the first time, the singular
phenomena presented by the reproductive processes of these
animals, — phenomena so strange, and so utterly unlike any-
thing then known to occur in the whole province of zoology,
that Chamisso's admirably clear and truthful account was re-
ceived with almost as much distrust as if he had announced the
existence of a veritable Peter Schlemihl."

According to Chamisso, salps appeared in two forms :
solitary forms, and forms in which a number of salps
are united into a long chain. Each salp of the aggre-
gate form contains within it an embr3'0 receiving nu-
trition from the mother bv a connection similar to the

54 Thomas HcMiry Huxley

placenta by which the einbr}-© of a mammal receives
nourishment from the blood of the mother. These
embr3^os grow up into the solitary form, and the soli-
tary form gives rise to a long chain of the aggregate
form which developes in the interior of the body,
Chamisso compared this progress to the development
of insects. " Supposing," he said, " caterpillars did
not bodily change into butterflies, but by a process of
sexual breeding produced young which grew into the
ordinary adults, and that these adults, as indeed thej^
do, gave rise to caterpillars by sexual reproduction,
then there would be a true alternation of generations."
The first generation would give rise to a second gene-
ration totally unlike itself, and this second generation
would reproduce, not its kind, but the first generation ;
such an alternation of generations he stated to occur
among the salps. Huxley had an excellent opportun-
ity to study this question at Cape York in November,
1849. " For a time the sea was absolutely crowded
with Salpse, in all stages of growth, and of size very
convenient for examination." He was able to verify
the general truth of Chamisso' s statement. The aggre-
gate form of Salpa always gives rise to the solitary
salps, and the solitary salps always give rise to chains
of the aggregate salps. But the process of reproduc-
tion he shewed to be quite different in the two cases.
The solitary salp produces in its interior a little stolon
or diverticulum which contains an outgrowth from the
circulato^-y system, and this stolon gradually becomes
pinched off into the members of the chain of the aggre-
gate form. The salps of the aggregate form are there-
fore merely buds from the solitary form, and are not
produced in the ordinary way, by sexual generation.
On the other hand, each salp of the chain has within it

Phosphorescence 55

a true egg-cell. This is fertilised by a male cell, and
within the body of the parent, nourished by the blood
of the parent, grows up into the sohtary form. There
is then an alternation of generations, but there are not
two sexual generations. The sexual generation of
chain salps gives rise to forms which reproduce by
buds. From this conclusion, with which all later ob-
servers have agreed, Huxley went on to his theory of
individuality. Different names had been given to the
two forms, but Huxley declared that neither form was
a true zoological individual ; they were only parts of
individuals or organs, and the true individual was the
complete cycle involving both forms.

In addition to determining the interesting method of
reproduction, Huxley made an elaborate investigation
of the structure of Salpa. On one occasion only the
Rattlesnake came across a quantity of an allied Ascidian,
Pyrosoma, which had received its name from its phos-
phorescence.

"The sky was clear but moonless, and the sea calm; and a
more beautiful sight can hardly be imagined than that pre-
sented from the deck of the ship as she drifted, hour after hour,
through this shoal of miniature pillars of fire gleaming out of
the dark sea, with an ever-waning, ever brightening, soft
bluish light, as far as the eye could reach on every side. The
Pj^rosomata floated deep, and it was only with difficulty that
some were procured for examination and placed in a bucket-
ful of sea-water. The phosphorescence was intermittent, peri-
ods of darkness alternating with periods of brillianc}-. The
light commenced in one spot, apparently on the surface of one
of the zooids, and gradually spread from this as a centre in all
directions ; then the whole was lighted up : it remained bril-
liant for a few seconds, and then gradually faded and died
away, until the whole mass was dark again. Friction at any
point induces the light at that point, and from thence the
phosphorescence spreads over the whole, while the creature is

56 Thomas Henry Huxley

quite freshly taken ; afterwards, the illumiuation arising from
friction is only local."

Dealing with these creatures in the broad anatomical
spirit with which he had studied the Medusae, Huxley
shewed the typical structure manifested in the different
forms, and that was common to them and the Ascidians
or sea-squirts of the seashore. In a second paper on
" Appendicularia and Doliolum " he made further
contributions to our knowledge of these interesting
creatures. Appendicularia is a curious little Ascidian,
differing from all the others in its possession of a tail.
Earlier observers had obtained it on various parts of
the ocean surface, bnt had failed entirely to detect its
relationship to the ordinary Ascidians. Chamisso got
it near Behring's Straits and thought that it was more
nearly allied to " Venus's Girdle," a Coelenterate.
Mertens, another distinguished zoologist, had declared
that " the relation of this animal with the Pteropods (a
peculiar group of molluscs) is unmistakable"; while
IMiiller, a prince among German anatomists, con-
fessed that " he did not know in what division of the
animal kingdom to place this creature." Huxley
shewed that it possessed all the characteristic features
of the Ascidians, the same arrangement of organs, the
same kind of nervous system, a respiratory chamber
formed from the fore part of the alimentary canal, and
a peculiar organ running along the phar5'nx which
Huxley called the endostyle and which is one of the
most striking peculiarities of the whole group. The
real nature of the tail was Huxley's most striking dis-
covery. He pointed out that ordinary Ascidians begin
life as tiny tadpole-like creatures which swim freely by
the aid of a long caudal appendage ; and that while
these better-known Ascidians lose their tails when they

Ascidians 57

settle clown into adult life, the Appendicularice are
Ascidians which retain tliis larval structure throughout
life. Von Baer had shown that in the great natural
groups of higher animals some forms occur which
typify, in their adult condition, the larval state of the
higher forms of the group. Thus, among the amphibia,
frogs have tails in the larval or tadpole condition ; but
newts throughout life remain in the larval or tailed
condition. Appendicularia he considered to be the
lowest form of the Ascidians, and to typify in its adult
condition the larval stages of the higher Ascidians.

By this remarkable investigation of the structure of
the group of Ascidians, and display of the various
grades of organisation, Huxley paved the way for one of
the great modern advances in knowledge. When, later
on, the idea of evolution was accepted, and zoologists
began hunting out the pedigree of the back-boned ani-
mals, it was discovered that Ascidians were modern
representatives of an important stage in the ancestry
of vertebrate animals, and, therefore, of man himself.
There are few more interesting chapters in genealogical
zoology than those which reveal the relationship be-
tween Amphioxus and fish on the one hand, and
Ascidians on the other ; for fish are vertebrates, and
Ascidians, on the old view, are lowly invertebrates.
The details of these relationships have been made
known to us by the brilliant investigations of several
Germans, by Kowalevsky, a Russian, by the English-
men Ray I^ankester and Willey, and by several
Americans and Frenchmen. But behind the work of
all these lies the pioneer work of Huxley, who first
gathered the group of Ascidians together, and in a
series of masterly investigations described its typical
structure.

58 Thomas Henry Huxley

Huxley's next great piece of work was embodied in a
memoir published in the Transactions of the Royal
Society in i<S53, and which remains to the present day
a model of luminous description and far-reaching ideas.
It was a treatise on the structure of the great group of
molluscs, and displays in a striking fashion his method
of handling anatomical facts, and deducing from them
the great underlying principles of construction. The
shell-fish with which he dealt specially were those
distinguished as cephalous, because, unlike creatures
such as the oj^ster and mussel, they had something
readih- comparable with the head of vertebrates. He
began hy pointing out what problems he hoped to solve.
The anatoni}^ of many of the cephalous molluscs was
known, but the relation of structures present in one to
structures present in another group had not been settled.

" It is not settled whether the back of a cuttle-fish answers to
the dorsal or ventral surface of a gasteropod. It is not decided
whether the arms and funnels of the one have or have not their
homologues in the other. The dorsal integument of a Doris
and the cloak of a whelk are both called ' mantle,' without any
evidence to show that they are really homologous. Nor do
very much more definite notions seem to have prevailed with
regard to the archetypal molluscous form, and the mode in
which (if such an archetype exist) it becomes modified in the
different secondary types."

He had taken from the surface of the sea a number of
transparent shell-fish, and had been able to study the
structure and arrangement of their organs " by simple
inspection, without so much as disturbing a single beat
of their hearts." From knowledge gained in this
fashion, and from ordinary- dissection of a number of
common snails, cephalopods, and pteropods, he was
able to describe in a very complete way the anatomical

Archetypal Mollusc 59

structure of cephalous molluscs. The next natural
step, he stated, would have been to describe the em-
bryonic development of the organs of these different
creatures in order that a true knowledge might be
gained of what were the homologous or really corre-
sponding parts in each. Having had no opportunity
to make such embryological studies for himself, he fell
back on numerous accounts of development by Kol-
liker, Van Beneden, Gegenbauer, and others, and so
gradually arrived at a conception of what he called the
" archetype " of the cephalous molluscs. As the word
archetype was borrowed from old metaphysical ideas dat-
ing back to the time of Plato, he took care to state that
what he meant by it was no more than a form embody-
ing all that could be affirmed equally respecting every
single kind of cephalous mollusc, and by no means an
" idea " upon which it could be supposed that animal
forms had been modelled. He described this archetype,
and showed the condition of the different systems of
organs which it could be supposed to possess, and how
these organs were modified in the different existing
groups. This archetypal mollusc of Huxley's was a
creature wnth a bilaterally symmetrical head and body.
On the ventral side of the body it possessed a peculiar
locomotor appendage, the so-called foot, and the dorsal
surface of the body secreted a shell. Its nervous system
consisted of three pairs of ganglia or brains, one pair in
the head, one in the foot, and a third in the viscera.
He shewed how the widely different groups of cephal-
ous molluscs could be conceived as modifications of
this structure, and extended the conception so as to
cover all other molluscs.

Quite apart from the anatomical value of this paper,
and although all technical details have been omitted

6o Thomas Henry Huxley

here, it is necessary to say that merely as a series of
intricate anatomical descriptions and comparisons, this
memoir was one of the most valuable of any that Hux-
lej^ wrote. The working out of the theory of the
archetj'pe is peculiarl}' interesting to compare with
modern conceptions. To those of us who began bio-
logical work after the idea of evolution had been im-
pressed upon anatomical work, it is very difficult to
follow Huxley's papers without reading into them evo-
lutionary ideas. In the article upon Mollusca, written
for the ninth edition of the Encyclopcvdia Britajmica, by
Professor Ra\' lyankester, the .same device of an arche-
typal or, as Lankester calls it, a schematic mollusc, is
employed in order to explain the relations of the differ-
ent structures found in different groups of mollu.scs to
one another. Lankester's schematic mollusc differs
from Huxlej^'s archetypal mollusc onlj- as a finished
modern piece of mechanism, the final result of 3'ears of
experiment, differs from the original invention. The
method of comparing the schematic mollusc with the
different divergent forms in dift'erent groups is identi-
cal, and yet, while the ideas of Darwin are accepted in
ev^er}' line of lyankester's work, Huxley was writing
six 5'ears before the publication of The Origin of Species.
There was growing up in Huxley's mind, partly from
his own attempts to arrange the anatomical facts he dis-
covered in an intelligible .series, the idea that within a
group the divergencies of structure to be found had
come about by the modification of an original t)'pe.
Not only did he conceive of such an evolution as the
only possible explanation of the facts, but he definitely
used the word evohition to convey his ideas. On the
other hand, he was firmly convinced that such evolu-
tion was confined within the great groups. For each

Evolution before Darwin 6i

group there was a typical structure, and modifications
by defect or excess of the parts of the definite archetype
gave rise to the different members of the group. More-
over, he confined this evolution in the strictest possible
way to each group ; he did not believe that what was
called anamorphosis — • the transition of a lower t3'pe
into a higher type — ever occurred. To use his own
words :

"If, however, all Cephalous Mollusca, i. e., all Cephalopoda,
Gasteropoda, and Ivamellibraucbiata, be ouly modificatious by
excess or defect of the parts of a definite archetype, theu, I
think, it follows as a necessary consequence, that no anamor-
phosis takes place in this group. There is no progression
from a lower to a higher type, but merely a more or less com-
plete evolution of one type. It may indeed be a matter of very
grave consideration whether true anamorphosis ever occurs in
the whole animal kingdom. If it do, then the doctrine that
every natural group is organised after a definite archetype, a
doctrine which seems to me as important for zoology as the
theory of definite proportions for chemistry, must be given up."

It is of great historical interest to notice how closely
actual consideration of the facts of the animal kingdom
took zoologists to an idea of evolution, and yet how far
the^^ were from it as we hold it now. It is fashionable
at the present time to attempt to depreciate the immense
change introduced b}^ Darwin into zoological specula-
tion, and the method employed is largely partial quota-
tion, or reference to the kind of ideas found in papers
such as this memoir b}' Huxle3^ The comparison be-
tween the types of the great groups and the combining
proportions of the chemical elements shows clearly that
Huxley regarded the structural plans of the great
groups as properties necessary and inherent in these
groups, just as the property of a chemical element to

62 Thomas Henry Huxley

combine with another chemical substance only in a
fixed proportion is necessary and inherent in the exist-
ing conception of it. There was no ghmmer of the
idea that these types were not inherent, but merely
historical results of a long and slow series of changes
produced by the interaction of the varied conditions of
life and the intrinsic qualities of living material.

In two lectures delivered at the Royal Institution in
1854 and 1855, the one on " The Common Plan of Ani-
mal Forms," the other on " The Zoological Arguments
Adduced in Favour of the Progressive Development of
Animal Life in Time," show, so far as the published
abstracts go, the same condition of mind. The idea of
progressive development of all life from common forms
was not unknown to Huxley and his contemporaries,
but was rejected by them. In the first of these two
lectures he took four great groups of animals, the Verte-
brates, the Articulata, the Mollusca, and the Radiata,
and explained what was the archetype of each. He
shewed the distinctiveness of each plan of structure, and
then discussed the relations of the ideas suggested by
Von Baer to these archetypes. He stated explicitly
that while the adult forms were quite unlike one an-
other, there were traces of a common plan to be derived
from a stud}^ of their embryonic development. Such a
trace of a common plan he had himself suggested when
he compared the foundation-membranes of the Medusae
with the first foundation-membranes of vertebrate em-
bryos. This was going a long way towards modern
ideas ; but he stopped short, and gav^e no hint that he
believed in the possibility of the development of one
plan from a lower or simpler plan. The second lecture
dealt with the kind of ideas which were crystallised in
the popular but striking work of Chambers, entitled

Introduction to Palaeontology 63

Vestiges of Creation. Chambers attacked the theological
view that all animals and plants had been created at
the beginning of the world, and maintained that geo-
logical evidence showed the occurrence of a progressive
development of animal life. Huxlej^, like all zoologists
and geologists who knew anything of the occurrence
of fossils in the rocks of past ages, agreed with the
general truth of the conception that a progressive de-
velopment had occurred which showed that the species
now existing were represented in the oldest rocks by
species now extinct. But the examples he brought for-
ward were all limited to evolution within the great
groups, and did not aflfect his idea that archetypes were
fixed and did not pass into each other. Moreover, he
summed up strongly against the suggestion that there
was any parallel between the succession of life in the
past and the forms assumed by modern animals in their
embryological development. So far as the present
writer is able to judge from study of the literature of
this period, the possibility of evolution was present in
an active form in the minds of Huxley and of his con-
temporaries, and in an extraordinary wa}' they brought
together evidence which afterwards became of firstrate
importance ; but the idea in its modern sense was re-
jected by them.

In 1854 Huxley's uncomfortable period of probation
came to an end. Edward Forbes, who held the posts of
Palaeontologist to the Geological Survey, and Lecturer
on General Natural History at the Metropolitan School
of Science Applied to Mining and the Arts, vacated
these on his appointment to the Chair of Natural His-
tory in the University of Edinburgh, and Sir H. De La
Beche, the then Director- General of the Geological
Survey, offered both the posts to Huxley — who in June

64 Thomas Henry Huxley

and July of that year had given lectures at the school
in place of Forbes. Huxley says himself :

"I refused the former poiut-blank, and accepted the latter
only provisionally, telling Sir Henry that I did not care for
fossils, and that I should give up natural history as soon as I
could get a physiological post. But I held the office for thirty-
one years, and a large part of my work has been palaeonto-
logical."

The salary of the post of IvCCturer on Natural History
was scanty, but De La Beche, who evidently recognised
Huxley's genius, and was anxious to have him attached
even against his will to palaeontological work, created
a place for him as Naturalist to the Geological Survey',
by which a more suitable income was found for him.
His official duties were at first in the Geological Museum
of the Surv^ey, but were distinguished from those of the
special Palaeontologist, Mr^ Harvey. His income was
now assured, and for the rest of his life, until towards
its close, when he retired to Eastbourne, he lived the
ordinary life of a professional man of science in Lon-
don. He was now able to marry, and on July 21, 1855,
he was married to a lady whom he had met in Sydney
in 1847, and whom he had not seen since the Rattle-
snake left Sydney finally in the beginning of May, 1850.
During the years 1856, 1857, and 1858, he held the
post of Fullerian Professor of Physiology in the Royal
Institution, choosing as the title of his first two courses
of lectures Physiology and Comparative Anatomy, as
he still cherished the idea of being in the first place a
physiologist.

" Moreover," writes Professor Michael Foster, "like most
other young professional men of science, he had to eke out his
not too ample iucome by labours undertaken chiefly for their

THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY, 18S7

Reproduced by permission from Natural Science^ vol. vii., No. 42

Vertebrate Skull 65

pecuniary reward. He acted as examiner, conducting for in-
stance, during the years 1856 to 1S63, and again 1865 to 1870,
the examinations in physiology and comparative anatomy at
the University of London, making even an examination paper
feel the influence of the new spirit in biology ; and among his
examinees at that time there was at least one who, knowing
Huxley's writings, but his writings only, looked forward to the
viva voce test, not as a trial but as an occasion of delight. He
wrote almost incessantly for all editors who were prepared to
give adequate pay to a pen able to deal with scientific themes
in a manner at once exact and popular, incisive and correct.
During this period he was gradually passing from his first
anatomical love, the structure of the Invertebrates, to Verte-
brate work, and although he continued to take a deep interest
in the course of the progress of research in that group of ani-
mals, the publication of his great work on oceanic hydrozoa by
the Ray Society was the last piece of important work he wrote
upon any anatomical subject apart from vertebrates. His work
in connection with the Geological Survey naturally attracted
his attention most closely to vertebrates, and, towards the close
of the fifties, he was led to make a special study of vertebrate
embryology, a subject which the investigations of Kolliker and
others in Germany were bringing into prominence. The first
result of this new direction of his enquiries was embodied in a
Croonian Lecture delivered in 1S58 ' On the Theory of the
Vertebrate Skull.' Sir Richard Owen, who was at that time
the leading vertebrate anatomist in England, had given his
support to an extremely complicated view of the skull as being
formed of a series of expanded vertebrse moulded together.
The theory was really a legacy from an old German school of
which the chief members were Goethe, the poet, and Oken, a
naturalist, who was more of a metaphysical philosopher than of
a morphologist. Huxley pointed out the futility of attempting
to regard the skull as a series of segments, and of supporting
this view by trusting to superficial resemblances and abstract
reasoning, when there was a definite method by which the
actual building up of the skull might be followed. Following
the lines laid down by Rathke, another of the great Germans
from whose investigations he was always so willing to find
corroboration and assistance in his own labours, he traced the
5

66 Thomas Henry Huxley

actual development of the skull in the individual. He shewed
that the foundations of the skull and of the backbone were laid
down in a fashion quite different, and that it was impossible to
regard both skull and backbone as modifications of a common
type laid down right along the axis of the body. The spinal
column and the skull start from the same primitive condition,
whence they immediately begin to diverge. It may be true to
say that there is a primitive identity of structure between the
spinal or vertebral column and the skull ; but it is no more
true that the adult skull is a modified vertebral column than it
would be to afl&rm that the vertebral column is a modified
skull."

Since this famous lecture, a number of distinguished
anatomists have studied the development of the skull
more fully ; but they have not departed from the meth-
ods of investigation laid down by Huxley, and their
conclusions have differed only in greater elaboration of
detail from the broad lines laid down by him. Apart
from its direct scientific value, this lecture was of im-
portance as marking the place to which Huxley had
attained in the scientific world. Two years later, it is
true, the lyOndon Times, referring to a famous debate
at a meeting of the British Association at Oxford, spoke
of him as " a Mr. Huxley " ; but in the scientific world
he was accepted as the leader of the younger anatomists,
and as one at least capable of rivalling Owen, who was
then at the height of his fame. The Croonian Lecture
was in a sense a deliberate challenge to Owen, and in
these days before Darwin, to challenge Owen was to
claim equality with the greatest name in anatomical
science.

CHAPTER V

CREATURES OP THE PAST

Beginning Palajontological Work — Fossil Amphibia and Rep-
tilia — Ancestry of Birds — Ancestry of the Horse — Imper-
fect European Series Completed by Marsh's American
Fossils — Meaning of Geological Contemporaneity — Uni-
formitarianism and Catastrophism Compared with Evolu-
tion in Geology— Age of the Earth — Intermediate and
Linear Types.

AIvTHOUGH Huxley took a post connected with
Geology only because it was the most convenient
opening for him, it was not long before he became
deeply interested not only in the fossils, which at first
he despised, but in the general problems of geology.
He began by co-operation with Mr. Salter in the de-
termination of fossils for the Geological Survey. The
mere work of defining genera and species and naming
and describing new species appealed very little to him.
He had none of the collector's passion for new species ;
his interest in a creattire being not whether or no it was
new to science, but what general problems of biology
its structure helped to elucidate. While he assisted in
the routine work of determining the zoological position
of the fossils sent in to the museum by the Survey, he
carried investigations much farther than the duties of

67

68 Thomas Henry Huxley

the post required when interesting zoological problems
arose. His earliest notes were written in association
with his colleague, and consisted of technical descrip-
tions of some small fossils from the Downton Sand-
stones which were supposed to be fish-shields. The
peculiarities of structure presented by these aroused
his interest, and he began an elaborate series of investi-
gations upon palaeozoic fishes in general. Earlier
zoologists, such as the great Agassiz, had devoted
most of their attention to careful and exact description
of the different fossil fishes with which they became
acquainted. Huxley at once began to investigate the
relations that existed among the different kinds of
structure exhibited in the different fish. He laid down
the lines upon which future work has been conducted,
and, precisely as he did in the case of molluscs, he
started future investigators upon lines of research the
ends of which have not 3'et been reached. His work
upon Devonian Fishes, published in 1861, threw an en-
tirely new light upon the affinities of these creatures,
and still remains a standard work.

He made a similar, although less important, series
of investigations upon some of the great extinct Crus-
tacea; but, perhaps, his most important palaeontological
work was done later, after he had been convinced by
Darwin of the fact of evolution. In 1855 he had ex-
pressed the opinion that the study of fossils was hope-
less if one sought in it confirmation of the doctrine of
evolution; but five-and-twenty years' continuous work
completeh' reversed his opinion, and in 1881, address-
ing the British Association at York he declared that
" if zoologists and embryologists had not put forward
the theory, it would have been necessary for palaeon-
tologists to invent it." In three special groups of

Labyrinthodonts 69

animals his study of fossils enabled him to assist in
bridging over the gaps between surviving groups of
creatures by study of creatures long extinct. He began
to study the structure of the L,ab3'rinthodonts, a group
of extinct monsters which received their name from the
peculiar structure of their teeth. He published elaborate
descriptions of Anthracosaurus from the coal-measures
of Northumberland, of IvOxomma from the lower car-
boniferous of Scotland, and of several small forms from
the coal-measures of Kilkenny, in Ireland, as well as
describing skulls from Africa and a number of frag-
mentary bones from dififerent localities. But in all this
work it was the morpholog}' of the creatures that inter-
ested him, and the light which their structure threw
upon the structure of each other and of their nearest
allies. He shewed that these monsters stood on the
borderland between fishes, amphibia, and reptiles, and
he added much to our knowledge of the true structure
of these great groups. Next, he turned to the extinct
reptiles of the Mesozoic age. It was generall}^ believed
that the Pterodactyls, or fij'ing reptiles, were the nearest
allies of birds, but Huxley insisted that the resemblances
between the wings were .simply such superficial resem-
blances as necessarily exist in organs adapted to the
same purpose. About the same time, Cope in America,
and Phillips and Huxley, in England, from study of
the bones of the Dinosaurs, another great group of ex-
tinct reptiles, declared that these were the nearest in
structure to birds. In association with the upright
posture, the ilium or great haunch-bone of birds ex-
tends far forwards in front of the articulation of the
thigh-bone, so that the pelvis in this region has a
T-shape, the ilium forming the cross-bar of the T, and
the femur or thigh-bone the downward limb. Huxley

70 Thomas Henry Huxley

shewed that a large number of the Dinosaurs had this
and other peculiarities of the bird's pelvis, and sepa-
rated these into a group which he called the " Ornitli-
oscelida," seeing in them the closest representatives
of the probable reptilian ancestors of birds. While
further work and the discovery of a still greater num-
ber of extinct reptiles has made it less probable that
these were the actual ancestors of birds, Huxley's work
in this, as in the many other cases we have shown,
proved not onl}^ of great value in itself, but led to a
continually increasing series of investigations by others.
It is not always the pioneer that makes the greatest
discoveries in a new country, but the work of the
pioneer makes possible and easier the more assured dis-
coveries of his followers.

A third great piece of palseontological investigation
with which the name of Huxley will always be associ-
ated, is the most familiar of all the instances taken from
fossils in support of the evolution of animals. This
famous case is the pedigree of the horse. In 1870, in
an address delivered to the Geological Society of Lon-
don, Huxley had shewn that there was a series of ani-
mals leading backwards from the modern horse to a
more generalised creature called Anchitherium, and
found in the rocks of the Miocene period. He sug-
gested that there were, no doubt, similar fos.sils leading
still further backwards towards the common mammalian
type of animal, wnth five fingers and five toes, and went
the length of suggesting one or two fossils which might
stand in the direct line of ancestry. But in 1876 he
visited America, and had the opportunity of consulting
the marvellous series of fossils which Professor Marsh
had collected from American Tertiary beds. Professor
Marsh allowed him the freest use of his materials and

Collaboration with Marsh 71

of liis conclusions, and the credit of the final result is to
be shared at least equally between Marsh and Huxley.
The final result was a demonstrative proof of the pos-
sible course of evolution of the horse, given in a lecture
deliv^ered by Huxley in New York on Sept. 22, 1876,
and illustrated by drawings from specimens in Marsh's
collection. The matter of the lecture has become so
important a part of all descriptive writing on evolution,
and the treatment is so characteristic of Huxlej^'s bril-
liant exposition, that it is worth while to make some
rather long quotations from it. The lecture was pub-
lished in the New York papers, and afterwards with
other matter formed a volume of American Addresses,
published by Macmillan, in lyondon.

" In most quadrupeds, as iu ourselves, the forearm contaius
distinct boues called the radius aud the ulua. The correspond-
ing region in the horse seems at first to possess but one bone.
Careful observation, however, enables us to distinguish in this
bone a part which clearly answers to the upper end of the ulna.
This is closely united with the chief mass of the bone which
represents the radius, and runs out into a slender shaft which
may be traced for some distance downwards on the back of the
radius, and then in most cases thins out and vanishes. It takes
still more trouble to make sure of what is nevertheless the fact,
that a small part of the lower end of the bone of the horse's
forearm, which is only distinct in a very young foal, is really
the lower extremity of the ulna.

"What is commonly called the knee of a horse is its wrist.
The ' cannon bone ' answers to the middle bone of the five
metacarpal bones which support the palm of the hand in our-
selves. The 'pastern,' 'coronarj,' and 'coffin ' bones of vet-
erinarians answer to the joints of our middle fingers, while the
hoof is simply a greatly enlarged and thickened nail. But, if
what lies below the horse's ' knee ' thus corresponds to the
middle finger in ourselves, what has become of the four other
fingers or digits? We find in the places of the second and
fourth digits only two slender splint-like bones, about two-

72 Thomas Hc^nry Huxley

thirds as long as the cannon bone, which gradually taper to
their lower ends and bear no finger joints, or, as they are
termed, phalanges. Sometimes small bony or gristly nodules
are to be found at the bases of these two metacarpal splints,
and it is probable that these represent rudiments of the first and
fifth digits. Thus the part of the horse's skeleton which corre-
sponds with that of the human hand contains one overgrown
middle digit, and at least two imperfect lateral digits ; and
these answer, respectively, to the third, the second, and the
fourth digits in man.

"Corresponding modifications are found in the hind limb.
In ourselves, and in most quadrupeds, the leg contains two
distinct bones, a large bone, the tibia, and a smaller and more
slender bone, the fibula. But, in the horse, the fibula seems,
at first, to be reduced to its upper end ; a short slender bone
united with the tibia and ending in a point below occupying its
place. Examination of the lower end of a young foal's shin-
bone, however, shews a distinct portion of osseous matter,
which is the lower end of the fibula ; so that the apparently
single lower end of the shin-bone is really made up of the
coalesced ends of the tibia and fibula, just as the apparently
single lower end of the fore-arm bone is composed of the
coalesced radius and ulna.

"The heel of the horse is the part commonly known as the
hock ; the hinder cannon bone answers to the middle metatar-
sal bone of the human foot, the pastern, coronary, and coffin
bones, to the middle-toe bones ; the hind hoof to the nail, as
in the fore foot. And, as in the fore foot, there are merelv two
splints to represent the second and fourth toes. Sometimes a
rudiment of a fifth toe appears to be traceable."

Having in the same fashion described the highly
complicated and pectiliar structure of the teeth of
modern horses, Huxley proceeded :

"To anyone who is acquainted with the morphology of
vertebrated animals, these characteristic structures of the horse
show that it deviates widely from the general structure of
mammals ; and that the horse type is, in many respects, an
extreme modification of the general mammalian plan. The

Teeth of Horses ']t^

least modified mammals, iu fact, have the radius aud ulna,
the tibia aud fibula, distinct and separate. They have five
distinct and complete digits on each foot, and no one of these
digits is very much larger than the rest. Moreover, in the
least modified mammals, the total number of the teeth is very
generally forty-four, while in the horse the usual number is
forty, and, in the absence of the canines, it may be reduced to
thirty-six ; the incisor teeth are devoid of the fold seen iu those
of the horse ; the grinders regularly diminish in size from the
middle of the series to its front end ; while their crowns are
short, early attain their full length, and exhibit simple ridges
or tubercles, in place of the complex foldings of the horse's
grinders.

" Hence the general principles of the hypothesis of evolution
lead to the conclusion that the horse must have been derived
from some quadruped which possessed five complete digits on
each foot ; which had the bones of the forearm and of the leg
complete and separate ; and which possessed forty-four teeth,
among which the crown of the incisors and grinders had a
simple structure ; while the latter gradually increased in size
from before backwards, at any rate in the anterior part of the
series, aud had short crowns.

" Aud if the horse had been thus evolved, and the remains
of the different stages of its evolution have been preserved,
they ought to present us with a series of forms in which the
number of the digits becomes reduced ; the bones of the fore-
arm and leg gradually take on the equine condition ; and the
form and arrangement of the teeth successively approximate
to those which obtain in existing horses.

" Let us turn to the facts and see how far they fulfill these
requirements of the doctrine of evolution.

" In Europe abundant remains of horses are found in the
Quaternary and later Tertiary strata as far as the Pliocene
formation. But these horses, which are so common in the
cave-deposits and in the gravel of Europe, are in all essential
respects like existing horses, and that is true of all the horses
of the later part of the Pliocene epoch. But, in the deposits
which belong to the earlier Pliocene, and later Miocene
epochs, and which occur in Britain, in France, in Germany, in
Greece, in India, we find animals which are extremely like

74 Thomas Henry Huxley

horses — which in fact are so similar to horses, that j-oii may
follow descriptious given in works upon the anatomy of the
horse, upon the skeletons of these animals — but which differ
in some important particulars. For example, the structure of
their fore and hind limbs is somewhat diflFerent. The bones,
which, in the horse are represented by two long splints, im-
perfect below, are as long as the middle metacarpal and meta-
tarsal bones ; and, attached to the extremity of each, is a digit
with three joints of the same general character as those of the
middle digit, only very nmch smaller. These small digits are
so disposed that they could have had but very little functional
importance, and they must have been rather of the nature of
the dew-claws, such as are to be found in many ruminant
animals. The Hipparioti, as the extinct European three-toed
horse is called, in fact presents a foot similar to that of the
American Pfotohippus except that in Hipparion the smaller
digits are situated further back, and are of smaller proportional
size than in the Protohippus.

"The ulna is slightly more distinct than in the horse ; and
the whole length of it, as a very slender shaft, intimately
united with the radius, is completely traceable. The fibula
appears to be in the same condition as in the horse. The teeth
of the Hipparion are essentially similar to those of the horse,
but the pattern of the grinders is in some respects a little more
complex, and there is a depression on the face of the skull in
front of the orbit, which is not seen in existing horses.

" In the earlier Miocene and perhaps in the Eocene deposits
of some parts of Europe, another distinct animal has been dis-
covered, which Cuvier, who first described some fragments of
it, considered to be a Palceotherium, but as further discoveries
threw new light on its structure, it was recognised as a distinct
genus, under the name oi Anchithcriuin.

"In its general characters the skeleton of A^ichithcriuvi is
very similar to that of the horse, in fact Lartet and De Blain-
ville called it Palceotheriutn equinum or Hippoides ; and
De Cristol, in 1847, said that it differed from Hipparion in little
more than the characters of the teeth, and gave it the name of
Hipparitheriuni. Each foot possesses three complete toes :
while the lateral toes are much larger in proportion to the
middle toe than in Hipparion, and doubtless rested on the

European Ancestors of the Horse 75

ground iu ordinary locomotion. The ulna is complete and
quite distinct from the radius, although firmly united with the
latter. The fibula seems also to have been complete ; its lower
end, though intimately united with that of the tibia, is clearly
united with that of the latter bone. There are forty-four teeth ;
the incisors have no strong pit. The canines seem to have
been well developed iu both sexes. The first of the seven
grinders, which, as I have said, is frequently absent, and, when
it does exist, is small in the horse, is a good-sized and per-
manent tooth, while the grinder which follows it is but little
larger than the hinder ones. The crowns of the grinders are
short, and, although the fundamental pattern of the horse-tooth
is discernible, the front and back ridges are less curved, the
accessory pillars are wanting, and the valleys, umch shallower,
are not filled up with cement."

Then, after describing his early efforts to trace the
descent of the horse from European fossils, Huxley
goes on to relate the new light thrown on the matter
from the American discoveries of Professor Marsh :

" You are all aware that, when your country was first discov-
ered by Europeans, there were no traces of the existence of
the horse in any part of the American continent. The accounts
of the conquest of Mexico dwell on the astonishment of the
natives of that country when they first became acquainted with
that astounding phenomenon, a man seated upon a horse.
Nevertheless, the investigations of American geologists have
proved that the remains of horses occur iu the most superficial
deposits of both North and South America, just as they do iu
Europe, Therefore, for some reason or other, — no feasible
suggestion on that subject, so far as I know, has been made, —
the horse must have died out on this continent at some period
preceding the discovery of America. Of late years there has
been discovered in your Western territories that marvellous
accumulation of deposits, admirably adapted for the preserva-
tion of organic remains, to which I referred the other evening,
and which furnishes us with a consecutive series of records of
the fauna of the older half of the Tertiary epoch, for which we

76 Tliomas Henry Huxley

have no parallel in lun-ope. The researches of Leidy and others
have shewn that forms allied to the Hipparion and the Aiichi-
therium are to be found among these remains. But it is only
recently that the admirably conceived and most thoroughly and
patiently v^-orked-out investigations of Professor Marsh have
given us a just idea of the vast fossil wealth and of the scien-
tific importance of these deposits. I have had the advantage of
glancing over the collections in Yale Museum ; and I can truly
say that, so far as my knowledge extends, there is no collection
from any one region and series of strata comparable, for extent,
or for care with which the remains have been got together, or
for their scientific importance, to the series of fossils which he
has deposited there. This vast collection has yielded evidence
bearing on the question of the pedigree of the horse of the most
striking character. It tends to show that we must look to
America rather than to Europe for the original seat of the equine
series ; and that the archaic forms and successive modifications
of the horse's ancestry are far better preserved here than in
Europe.

"Professor Marsh's kindness has enabled me to put before
you a diagram, every figure of which is an actual representation
of some specimen which is to be seen at Yale at this present
time.

"The succession of forms which he has brought together
carries us from the top to the bottom of the Tertiaries. Firstly,
there is the true horse. Next we have the American Pliocene
form of the horse {Plio/iippus) : in the conformation of its limbs
it presents some very slight deviations from the ordinary horse,
and the crowns of the grinding teeth are shorter. Then comes
the Protohippiis, which represents the European Hipparion,
having one large digit and two small ones on each foot, and the
general characters of the forearm and leg to which I have
referred. But it is more valuable than the European Hipparion
for the reason that it is devoid of some of the peculiarities of
that form — peculiarities which tend to show that the European
Hipparion is rather a member of a collateral branch than a
form in the direct line of succession. Next, in the backward
order in time, is the Jlfio/iippics, which corresponds pretty
nearly with the Anchitheriu})i of Europe. It presents three
complete toes — one large median and two smaller lateral ones :

American Fossils "]*]

and there is a rudimeut of that digit which answers to the little
finger of the human race.

"The European pedigree of the horse stops here; in the
America Tertiaries, on the contrary, the series of ancestral
equine forms is continued into the Eocene formations. An
older Miocene form, called Mesohipptis, has three toes in front,
with a large splint-like rudiment representing the little finger;
and three toes behind. The radius and ulna, the tibia and
fibula, are distinct, and the short crowned molar teeth are
Anchitherioid m pattern.

"But the most important discovery of all is the Orohippus
which comes from the Eocene formation, and is the oldest
member of the equine series yet known. Here we find four
complete toes on the front limb, three toes on the hind limb, a
well-developed ulna, a well-developed fibula, and short-crowned
grinders of a simple pattern.

"Thus, thanks to these important researches, it has become
evident that, so far as our present knowledge extends, the his-
tory of the horse type is exactly and precisely that which could
have been predicted from a knowledge of the principles of evo-
lution ; and the knowledge we now possess justifies us com-
pletely in the anticipation that, when the still lower Eocene
deposits, and those which belong to the Cretaceous period have
yielded up their remains of ancestral equine animals, we shall
find, first, a form with four complete toes and a rudiment of the
innermost or first digit in front, with probably a rudiment of
the fifth digit in the hind foot ; while, in the older forms, the
series of digits will be more and more complete until we come
to the five-toed animals, in which, if the doctrine of evolution
is well founded, the whole series must have taken its origin."

Just as Huxley was successful, when onl}^ the an-
cestry' to Miocene times was known, in predicting the
discov'er)' of older forms in the older Miocene and upper
Kocene, so his prediction of older Eocene forms carrying
the chain back to fiv^e-toed creatures proved correct.
One of the new links was indeed discovered before his
lecture had passed through the press, and he was able
to add in a footnote some details of the structure of the

/S Thomas Henry Miixley

four-toed Eohippus from the lower Eocene beds.
Further discoveries have connected these with the five-
toed ancestors of the Tapirs, .and there is the strongest
reason to suppose that we now know as nearly as possi-
ble the line of ancestry of the horse back to the primi-
tive forms common to all the higher mammals. It
would, of course, be beyond possibility of proof that the
exact fossils described were the actual ancestors of the
horse ; but that they are exceedingly close allies of
these, and that among them some actual ancestors exist
cannot reasonably be doubted.

Although he had embarked upon geological work
with some distaste, Huxley became ver}' closely associ-
ated with it as years went on, and indeed, about the
seventies, had abandoned his intention to devote him-
self specially to ph5'siology, and declared himself to be
in the first place a palseontologist. In 1876 he had ac-
complished so much that the Geological Society gave
him its chief distinction, awarding him the Wollaston
Medal in recognition of his services to geological
science. He acted as Secretary to the Geological
Society from 1859 to 1862, and he was President from
1868 to 1870. In 1862, the President being incapaci-
tated, Huxley delivered as Deputy-President the Presi-
dential Address. This address is famous in the history
of geology, because for the first time it stated clearly
and in permanent form a doctrine now taken as a first
principle in all geological text-books. A large part of
geology is the attempt to read the past history of the
earth from the evidence given by the successive strata
of rocks that form its crust.

" It is mathematically certain that, in any given vertical linear
section of an undisturbed series of sedimentary deposits, the
bed which lies lowest is the oldest. In many other vertical

Geological Addresses 79

linear sectious of the same series, of course corresponding beds
will occur in a similar order."

It is of the utmost importance to determine whether or
no the same series occurring vertically in the same
order in different parts of the earth were deposited at
the same time. To explain the problem, Huxley took
the following concrete example :

" The Lias of England and the Lias of Germany, the Creta-
ceous rocks of Britain and the Cretaceous rocks of Southern
India, are termed by geologists ' Contemporaneous ' forma-
tions ; but whenever any thoughtful geologist is asked whether
he means to say that they were deposited at the same time, he
says, ' No, only within the same great epoch.' And if, in pur-
suing the enquiry, he is asked what may be the approximate
value in time of a ' great epoch ' — whether it means a hun-
dred years, or a thousand, or a million, or ten million 3ears —
his reply is, ' I cannot tell.' "

Most of the standard writers on palaeontology had
assumed that the presence in two beds at different parts
of the world of the same fossils implied that the beds
were contemporaneous, that they had been formed at
the same time. Huxley pointed out that the fact of
identical fossils being present was, on the whole, evid-
ence against the beds having been formed at the same
time. Even some of the older writers who believed in
species having been created at definite places at definite
times had seen that time must have been required for
sets of animals to wander from the places in which thej^
had come into existence. The newer theory of evolu-
tion was equally opposed to the notion of the appear-
ance of similar animals at the same time on far-distant
parts of the earth. For such reasons he proposed to
reject the use of the word Contemporaneous as applied
to rockbeds in different localities which contained the

8o Thomas Henry Huxley

same fossils, and to replace it by the word Homotaxial,
which meant no more than that the beds occupied cor-
responding places in the geological history of the earth.
Huxley did not pretend that these arguments were
entirel}' original : the}- represented the drift of the best
geological opinion, and he seized hold of them and set
them down as permanent geological truths.

In 1869, in a Presidential Address to the Geological
Societ}', Huxley took up one of the burning questions
of the day. In the early part of the century, the dis-
cov^eries of geologists had been the occasion of great
distress to those good people who clung to a literal in-
terpretation of everything in the Bible. Long before
the doctrine of evolution and the descent of man from
lower animals had taken practical shape, there had been
a battle roval between geologists who declared that the
earth was many million years old, and had been in-
habited at least by animals and plants for enormous
periods, and those who clung to the traditional chro-
nology which placed the date of creation onh- a few
thousand j^ears from now. The continued progress of
geology, and the sturdy championship of it b}' men like
Sedgwick, Chalmers, and Buckland, who were at the
same time reputable theologians and distinguished
men of science, had decided the battle in favour of the
conclusions of science, and it was accepted generally
that the earth was almost indefinitely old. At the same
time, another and more strictly scientific dispute had
been in progress. The older school of geologists, look-
ing on the face of the world, and seeing it scarred bj-
might}' fissures, displaying huge distortions of the beds
in the crust, had argued that geological change had
taken place by a series of mighty catastrophes. The
tremendous results which they saw seemed to them

Uniformitarianism 8i

on]}7 possible on the theory that unusual and gigantic
displays of force had caused them. On the other hand,
Hutton and Lyell attempted to find adequate explana-
tion of the greatest changes in the slow forces which
may be seen in operation at the present time. Slow
movements of upheaval and depression, amounting at
most to an inch or two in a century, may be shown to be
actually in existence now, and such slow changes acting
for very many centuries would account for the raising
of continents above the sea, so that old sea-bottoms be-
came the surface of the land, and for the depression
of land areas so that new sedimentary rocks might be
deposited upon them. They shewed how air and water
slowly crumbled away the hardest rocks, and how
rivers deepened their beds steadily but excessively
slowly ; and they held that while great catastrophic
changes might occasionally have occurred, there was
ample evidence of the present operation of forces which,
granted sufficient time for their operation, would have
made the crust of the earth such as it is. This doctrine
of Uniformitarianism, of the action of similar forces in
the past and present history of the earth, had almost
completely triumphed over the older catastrophic views.
As Huxley put it, the school of catastrophe put no
limit to the violence of forces which had operated ; the
uniformitarians put no limit to the length of time
during which forces had operated.

" Catastropliism has insisted upon the existence of a practi-
cally unlimited bank of force, on which Ihe theorist might
draw ; and it has cherished the idea of development of the
earth from a state in which its form, and the forces which it
exerted, were very different from those which we now know.

" Uniformitarianism, on the other hand, has with equal justice

insisted upon a practically unlimited bank of time, ready to
6

82 Thomas Henry Huxley

discount any quantity of hypothetical paper. It has kept be-
fore our ej^es the power of the infinitely little, time being
granted, and has compelled us to exhaust known causes before
flying to the unknown."

But there was a third influence at work in geology, an
inflnence which ma}' best be described in Huxley's
own words :

"I shall not make what I have to say on this head clear
unless I diverge, or seem to diverge, for a while, from the
direct path of my discourse so far as to explain what I take to
be the scope of geology itself. I conceive geology to be the
history of the earth, in precisely the same sense as biology is
the history of living beings ; and I trust you will not think
that I am overpowered by the influence of a dominant pursuit
if I say that I trace a close analogy between these two histories.

" If I study a living being, under what heads does the know-
ledge I obtain fall ? I can learn its structure, or what we call
its Anatomy ; and its development, or the series of changes it
passes through to acquire its complete structure. Then I find
that the living being has certain powers resulting from its own
activities, and the interaction of these with the activities of
other things — the knowledge of which is Physiology. Beyond
this, the living being has a position in space and time, which is
its Distribution. All these form the body of ascertainable facts
which coustitute the status quo of the living creature. But
these facts have their causes ; and the ascertainment of these
causes is the doctrine of Etiology.

"If we consider what is knowable about the earth, we shall
find that such earth- knowledge — if I may so translate the word
geology — falls into the same categories.

" What is termed stratigraphical geology is neither more nor
less than the anatomy of the earth ; and the history of the suc-
cession of the formations is a history of the succession of such
anatomies, or corresponds with development, as distinct from
generation.

"The internal heat of the earth, the elevation and depression
of its crust, its belching forth of vapours, ashes, and lava, are

Geology and Biology 83

its activities, in as strict a sense as are warmth and the move-
ments and products of respiration the activities of an animal.
The phenomena of the seasons, of the trade-vpinds, of the Gulf
Stream, are as much the results of the reaction between these
inner activities and outward forces, as are the budding of the
leaves in spring, and their falling in autumn the effects of the
interaction between the organisation of a plant and the solar
light and heat. And, as the study of the activities of the li\ang
being is called its physiology, so are these phenomena the sul>
ject matter of an analogous telluric physiology, to which we
sometimes give the name of meteorology ; sometimes of physi-
cal geography, sometimes that of geology. Again, the earth
has a place in space and time, and relations to other bodies in
both these respects, which constitute its distribution. This
subject is usually left to the astronomer ; but a knowledge of
its broad outlines seems to me to be an essential constituent of
the stock of geological ideas.

"All that can be ascertained concerning the structure, suc-
cession of conditions, actions, and position in space of the
earth, is the matter of its natural histor}-. But, as in Biology,
there remains the matter of reasoning from these facts to their
causes, which is just as much science as the other, and indeed
more ; and this constitutes geological aetiology.

" Having regard to this general scheme of geological know-
ledge and thought, it is obvious that geological speculation
may be, so to speak, anatomical and developmental specula-
tion, so far as it relates to points of stratigraphical arrangement
which are out of reach of direct observation ; or, it may be
physiological speculation so far as it relates to undetermined
problems relative to the activities of the earth ; or, it may be
distributional speculation, if it deals with modifications of the
earth's place in space ; or, finally, it will be aetiological specu-
lation if it attempts to deduce the history of the world, as a
whole, from the known properties of the matter of the earth,
in the conditions in which the earth has been placed."

Huxley then proceeded to shew that uniformitarian-
ism and catastrophism had neglected this last and most
important branch of geology, the attempt to trace the

84 Thomas Henry Huxley

interaction of causes which had brought the world into
its present condition. He gave a striking display of
the wide knowledge of his reading by going back to
the foundation of this branch of modern science, and
giving a masterly account of the then little-known
treatise of Inimanuel Kant, who in 1775 had written
A/i Attempt to Account for the Constitutional and
Mechanical Origin of the Universe upon Nezvtonian
Principles. Next he declared that evolution embraced
all that was sound in both catastrophism and uniform-
itarianism while rejecting the arbitrary limits and
assumptions of both.

Finally he came to the great question to which these
observations upon the existing schools of geology had
led. The most distinguished physicist of the age, then
Sir William Thomson, now L,ord Kelvin, and Huxley's
immediate successor in the Presidential Chair of the
Royal Society, had stated that the English school of
geology had assumed an impossible age for the earth.
By physical reasonings, Thomson stated that he was
able to prove " That the existing state of things on the
earth — all geological history showing continuity of life
— must be limited within some such period of time as
one hundred million years." This pronouncement had
been received wnth acclamation by those who feared the
geological and biological sciences, as a sign of internal
dissensions within the house of science. Huxley, then,
as all through the latter part of his life, at once con-
stituted himself the champion of science, and, taking
Thomson's arguments one by one, shewed by a series
of masterly deductions from known facts that there was
a great deal to be said for the other side, and that phy-
sicists were as little certain as geologists could be of the
exact duration of time that had elapsed since the dawn

Age of the Earth 85

of life. His plea for more time since the cooling of the
globe than physicists were willing to allow remains one
of the classics of geological literature. But he carried
the question much farther. The inference which was
widely drawn by the enemies of evolution from the
arguments of Sir William Thomson w^as that if geo-
logists had overestimated the age of the cooled earth
there was not time for the evolution of animals and
plants to have taken place. Huxley pointed out a fact
which should be quite obvious, but which even yet is
frequently neglected. The evidence for the gradual
appearance of life in the past history of the earth de-
pends simply on the fact that the successive forms
of life appear in successive strata, and the length of
time taken for these changes simply depends upon the
length of time which was taken up b}' the formation of
the strata. Our only reason for supposing the evolu-
tion of life, made plain by fossil records, to have taken
place very slowly is that geologists have stated that the
deposition of the strata took place very slowl3\ Whether
these strata were deposited slowl}' or less slowly, we
know that the forms of life changed at the same rate.

" Biology takes her time from geology. The only reason we
have for believing in the slow rate of change in living forms is
the fact that they persist through a series of deposits which,
geology informs us, have taken a long while to make. If the
geological clock is wrong, all the naturalist will have to do is
to modify his notion of the rapidity of change accordingly ; and
I venture to point out that, when we are told that the limita-
tion of the period during which living beings have inhabited
this planet to one, two, or three hundred million years re-
quires a complete revolution in geological speculation, the
onus probandi rests on the maker of the assertion, who brings
forward not a shadow of evidence in its support."

Perhaps, although this is now an old controversy, it is

86 Thomas Henry Huxley

worth while to recall that the keenness of Huxlej-'s
language was not directed against Sir William Thom-
son, between whom and Huxley there was no more
than the desire to argue out an interesting scientific
question upon which their conclusions differed, but be-
tween Huxley and those outsiders who were always
ready to turn any dubious question in science into an
argument discrediting the general conclusions of
science.

The last time that Huxlej' occupied the Presidential
Chair of the Geological Societ\' was in 1870, and he
occupied his Presidential address by a review of the
" old judgments " which he had given in the course of
his first address in 1862. The address was entitled
" Palaeontology and Evolution," and the most im-
portant part of it was a complete withdrawal of the
fears he had expressed that geology would not supply
definite evidence of the transformation of species. Im-
portant discoveries had come thick and fast ; and, at
least in the case of the higher vertebrates, he declared
that, however one might " sift and criticise them,"
they left a clear balance in favour of the doctrine of the
evolution of living forms one from another. But, with
his usual critical spirit, examining arguments that bore
against a conclusion for which he hoped almost more
stringently than arguments apparentlj^ favourable to
what he expected to be true, Huxley made an im-
portant distinction, the value of which becomes more
and more apparent as time goes on. In the first flush
of enthusiasm for Darwinism, zoologists and palaeon-
tologists allowed their zeal to outrun discretion in the
formation of family trees. They examined large series
of living or extinct creatures, and so soon as they found
gradations of structure present, the}^ arranged their

Intermediate Types 87

specimens in a linear series, from the simplest to the
most complex, and declared that the arrangement was
a representation of the family tree. The fact that the
line of descent apparently could have followed along
the direction they suggested they were inclined to take
as evidence that it had so followed. Huxle}" made the
most careful distinction between what he called inter-
mediate types and types with a right to be placed in
linear order.

" Every fossil which takes au intermediate place between
forms of life already known may be said, so far as it is inter-
mediate, to be evidence in favour of evolution, inasnmch as it
shews a possible road by which evolution may have taken
place. But the mere discovery of such a form does not, in
itself, prove that evolution took place by and through it, nor
does it constitute more than a presumptive evidence in favour
of evolution in general." " The fact that Anoplot/ieridcv ?LTe
intermediate between pigs and ruminants does not tell us
whether the ruminants have come from the pigs or the pigs
from the ruminants, or both from Anoplotheridce, or whether
pigs, ruminants, and Anoplotheridce alike may not have
diverged from some common stock."

A familiar instance will make the point at issue plain.
Everyone knows that in many respects, in the structure
of the skeleton, and the curve of the backbone, and in
the development of the brain, the man-like monkeys,
the gorilla and its allies, are intermediate between
man and the lower monkeys. In the early days of evo-
lution it was assumed frequently that the gorilla, etc.,
were therefore to be regarded as ancestors of man, and
they appear as such in more than one well-known
treatise on evolutionary biology. We now know that
it is exceedingl}^ probable that the gorilla and its allies,
although truly intermediate types, and truly shewing
a possible path of evolution from the brute to man,

88

Thomas Henry Huxley

are not the actual ancestors of man, but cousins,
descendants like man from some more or less remote
common ancestor. And the tendency of recent ad-
vances in knowledge is more and more to throw stress
on the value of Huxley's distinction, and to minimise
confusion between "intermediate" and truly ances-
tral types.

^mMu

CHAPTER VI

HUXLEY AND DARWIN

Early Ideas on Evolution — Erasmus Darwin — Lamarck — Her-
bert Spencer— Difference between Evolution and Natural
Selection — Huxley's Preparation for Evolution — The Nov-
elty of Natural Selection — The Advantage of Natural
Selection as a Working Hypothesis — Huxley's Unchanged
Position with regard to Evolution and Natural Selection
from i860 to 1S94.

FROM our attempt to place together as much as
possible of Huxley's geological work in the last
chapter, it followed that we anticipated much that falls
properly within this chapter. The year 1859, the date
of publication of T/ie Origm of Species, is a momentous
date in the history of this century, as it was the 5'ear in
which there was giv^en to the world a theory that not
only revolutionised scientific opinion, but altered the
trend of almost every branch of thought. To under-
stand this great change, and the part played in it by
Huxley, it is necessary to be qtiite clear as to what
Darwin did. In the first place, he did not invent evo-
lution. The idea that all the varied structures in the
world, the divergent forms of rocks and minerals and
crystals, the innumerable trees and herbs that cover
the face of the earth like a mantle, and all the animal

89

go Thomas Henry Huxley

host of creatures great and small that dwell on the land
or dart through the air or people the waters, — that
all these had arisen by natural laws from a primitive
unformed material was known to the Greeks, was devel-
oped by the Romans, and even received the approval
of early Christian Fathers, who wrote long before the
idea had been invented that the naive legends of the
Old Testament were an authoritative and literal ac-
count of the origin of the world. After a long interval,
in which scientific thought was stifled by theological
dogmatism, the theory of evolution, particularly in its
application to animals, began to reappear, long before
Darwin published The Origin of Species. Buffon, the
great French naturalist, and Erasmus Darwin, the
grandfather of Charles, had expressed in the clearest
way the possibility that species had not been created
independently, but had arisen from other species. La-
marck had worked out a theory of descent in the fullest
detail, and regarded it as the foundatio" of the whole
science of biology. He taught that the beginning of
life consisted only of the simplest and lowest plants and
animals ; that the more complex animals and plants
arose from these, and that even man himself had come
from ape-like mammals. He held that the course of
development of the earth and of all the creatures upon
it was a slow and continuous change, uninterrupted by
violent revolutions. He summed up the causes of
organic evolution in the following propositions* :

" I. Life tends by its inlierent forces to increase the volume
of eacii living body and of all its parts up to a limit determined
by its own needs.

* See E. Clodd's Pioneers of Evolution, London, 1897, and
Osborn's From tlie Greeks to Darwin, New York, 1896.

Lamarck 91

" 2. New wants in animals give rise to new movements which
produce organs.

" 3. The development of these organs is in proportion to their
employment.

"4. New developments are transmitted to offspring."

He stipported especially the last two propositions by a
series of examples as to the effects of use and disuse ;
and the most famous of these, the theory that giraffes
had produced their long necks by contintially stretch-
ing up towards the trees on which they fed, is well
known to everyone. However, the ingenious specula-
tions of Lamarck were tmsupported by a sufficient range
of actual knowledge of anatomy, and lacked experi-
mental proof. He entirely failed to convince his con-
temporaries; and Darwin himself, in a letter to Lyell,
declared that he had gained nothing from two readings
of Lamarck's book. There can be little doubt but that
several Continental writers, in partictilar Haeckel,
have exaggerated Lamarck's services to the develop-
ment of the idea of evolution. On the other hand,
Lyell, although he strongly opposed the ideas of La-
marck and some curious notions of progressional crea-
tion due to the great Agassiz, had prepared the way
for Darwin by his adv^ocacy of natural causes and slow
changes in opposition to the catastrophic and miracu-
lous views in vogue. Above all, Herbert Spencer had
argued most strenuously in fav@ur of evolution. Thus,
in an important passage qtioted by Mr. Clodd from the
Leader of March 20, 1852, Spencer had written as
follows :

"Those who cavalierly reject the theory of evolution, as not n *;/
adequately supported by facts, seem quite to forget that their
own theory is not supported by facts at all. Like the majority
of men who are born to a given belief, they demand the most
rigorous proof of any adverse belief, but assume that their own

92 Thomas Henry Huxley

needs noue. Here we find, scattered over the globe, vegetable
and animal oryauisms numbering, of the one kind (according
to Humboldt) some 320,000 species, and of the other, some
2,000,000 species (see Carpenter) ; and if to these we add the
numbers of animal and vegetable species that have become
extinct, we may safely estimate the number of species that
have existed, and are existing, on the earth, at no less than
ten millions. Well, which is the most rational theory about
these ten millions of species ? Is it most likely that there have
been ten millions of special creations ; or is it most likely that
by continual modifications, due to change of circumstances, ten
millions of varieties have been produced, as varieties are being
produced still ? . . . Even could the supporters of the de-
velopment hypothesis merely shew that the origination of
species by the process of modification is conceivable, they
would be in a better position than their opponents. But they
can do much more than this. They can shew that the process
of modification has effected, and is effecting, decided changes
in all organisms subject to modifying influences. . . . They
can shew that in successive generations these changes con-
tinue, until ultimately the new conditions become the natural
ones. They can shew that in cultivated plants, domesticated
animals, and in the several races of men, such alterations have
taken place. They can show that the degrees of difference so
produced are often, as in dogs, greater than those on which
distinctions of species have been founded. They can shew,
too, that the changes daily taking place in ourselves — the
facility that attends long practice, and the loss of aptitude that
begins when practice ceases, — the strengthening of the passions
habitually gratified, and the weakening of those habitually
curbed, — the development of every faculty, bodily, moral, intel-
lectual, according to the use made of it — are all explicable on
this principle. And thus they can shew that throughout all
organic nature there is at work a modifying influence of the
kind they assign as the cause of these specific differences ; an
influence which, though slow in its action, does, in time, if the
circumstances demand it, produce marked changes— an influ-
euce which, to all appearance, would produce in the millions
of years, and under the great varieties of condition which geo-
logical records imply, any amount of change."

<?

Herbert Spencer 93

These and many other instances which might be
brought together from the pubHshed writings of the
half-century before the pubHcation of the Origin^ show
conclusively that the idea of evolution was far from
new, and that all through the first part of this century
dissatisfaction with the doctrine of the fixity of species
and of their miraculous creation was growing. The
great contribution of Darwin was this: First, b}^ his
theory of natural selection, he brought together the
known facts of variation, of struggle for existence, and
of adaptation to varying conditions, in such a way that
they provided men with a rational and known cause, a
cause the operation of which could be seen, for the
origin of species by means of preservation of favoured
races. Next, as to the origin of species, he brought to- (^
gether not only proofs of the actual operation of natural
selection, Vjut a body of evidence in favour of the fact of
evolution that was, beyond all comparison, more strik-
ing than had been adduced by any earlier philosophical
or biological writer. He convinced naturalists that
evolution was by far the most probable way in which
the living world had come to be what it is, and he made
them turn to examination of the animal and vegetable
kingdoms with a lively hope that the past history of
the living world was not an insoluble problem. Dar-
win's doctrine brought a new life into biological study,
and the result of the incomparably greater bulk of in-
vestigation that followed the year 1859 was a continual
increase of evidence in favour of the probability of evo-
lution, until now the whole scientific world, and the
majority of those who are unscientific, are content to
accept evolution as the only reasonable explanation of
the living world. It is well to remember that while
Darwin, by bringing forward the theory of struggle for

94 Thomas Henry Huxley

existence and resulting survival of the fittest, v^^as the
actual cause of the present assured position of evolution
as a first principle of science, it by no means follows
that the survival of the fittest has become similarly a
first principle of science. At cross roads a traveller
may choose the right path from a quite unsatisfactory
reason. Darwin himself, in the act of bringing forward
his own theory of natural selection, admitted the possi-
bility of the co-operation of many other agencies in
evolution, and at various times during the course of his
life he was inclined to attach, now more now less, im-
portance to these additional agencies. Huxley, as we
shall soon come to see, never wavered in his adhesion
to the facts of evolution after 1859; but, from first to
last, regarded natural selection as only the most prob-
able cause of the occurrence of evolution. Other
naturalists, of whom the best-known are Weismann
in Germany, Ray Lankester in England, and W. K.
Brooks in America, have come to attach a continually
increasing importance to the purely Darwinian factor
of natural selection ; while others again, such as Her-
bert Spencer in England, and the late Professor Cope
and a large American school, have advocated more and
more strongly the importance of what may be called the
Ivamarckian factors of evolution, — the inherited effects
of increased or diminished use of organs, the direct in-
fluence of the environment, and so forth. From the
fact that Darwin has persuaded the world of the truth
of evolution, evolution is often called Darwinism ; and
in this historically just though scientifically inaccurate
sense of the term, Huxley was a strict Darwinian, a
Darwinian of the Darwinians. From the facts that,
although natural selection had been formulated by
several writers before Darwin, and had been simul-

The Puzzle-Map of Life 95

taneously elaborated b}^ Wallace and Darwin, the
Origin of Species was the foundation of the modern
acceptation of evolution, and natural selection was the
key-note of the origin of species, natural selection may
be called Darwinism with both historical and scientific
accuracy ; and in this sense of the term Huxley was a
Darwinian ; a convinced but free-thinking and broad-
minded Darwinian, who was far from persuaded that
his tenet had a monopol}^ of truth, and who delighted
in shewing the distinctions between what seemed to
him probable and what was proved, and in absorbing
from other doctrines whatever he thought worthy to
be absorbed. The present writer has thought it so im-
portant to distinguish between these two sides of the
word Darivinism, that for the sake of clearness he has
stated what he believes to be the truth of Huxley's re-
lation to Darwin before beginning detailed exposition
of it.

In consideration of Huxley's position before 1859,
the most interesting feature of his zoological work is
the gradual preparation that it was making in his mind
for the doctrine of the Origin. He was like an engineer
boring a tunnel through a mountain, but ignorant of
how near he was to the pleasant valley on the other
side; and, above all, ignorant how rapidly he was being
met by a much more might}' excavation from the other
side. To use what is perhaps a more exact simile : he
was like a child with half the pieces of a puzzle-map,
slowly linking them together as far as they would fit,
and quite ignorant that presently the remaining half
would suddenly be given him, and with almost no
trouble would at once fit into the gaps he had neces-
sarily left, and transform a meaningless pattern into a
perfect and intelligible whole. Let us consider some

96 Thomas Henry Huxley

of these map pieces. The iiltiinate picture was the
conception of the whole world of life, past and present,
as a single famil}^ tree growing up from the simplest
possible roots, and gradually spreading out first into
the two main branches of animals and plants, and then
into the endless series of complicated ramifications
that make up livnng and extinct animals and plants.
Huxley was piecing together the scattered fragments,
and gradually learning to see here and there whole
branches, as yet separate at their lower ends, but in
themselves shapely, and showing a general resemblance
to one another in the gradual progression from simple
to complex. The greatest of these branches that he
had pieced together was the group of Medusae and
their allies, now known as Coelenterates. He had
formed similar branches for the Molluscs and minor
branches for the Salps and Ascidians, and, in his gen-
eral lectures on the whole animal kingdom, he had
shadowed out the broad arrangement of the main divi-
sions, or, as he called them, .types. He had seen in each
particular branch the clearest evidence of the laws of
growth which had directed its development, and had
realised that these laws of growth, consisting of gradual
modifications of common typical structures, were identi-
cal in the different branches. He had taken clear hold
of Von Baer's conception that the younger stages of
different types were more alike than the adult stages,
and here and there he had made comparisons between
the younger stages or simplest forms of his different
branches, and had shown that, without completely
realising it, he was ready for the idea that just as the
separate pieces could be arranged to form orderly
branches, so the separate branches might come to be
arranged as a single tree. And finally, in his lectures

Huxley on Lamarck 97

on " Protoplasm and Cells," and on the " Common
Structure of the Animal and Plant Kingdoms," he had
reached the conclusion that the two main divisions of
the living world were formed of the same stuff, dis-
played in identical fashion the elementary functions of
life, and were creatures of the same order. But, not-
withstanding this close approach to modern concep-
tions, he was not an evolutionist. When, in public, he
expressed deliberate convictions, these convictions were
against the general idea of evolution, until very shortly
before 1S59. In this opposition he was .supported
partly by the critical scepticism of his mind, which in
all things made him singularly unwilling to accept anj-
theories of any kind, but chiefly from the fact that tlie
books of the two chief supporters of evolutionary con-
ceptions impressed him very unfavourably. Huxley
writes :

"I had studied Ivamarck attentively, and I had read the
Vesiiges with due care ; but neither of them afforded me any
good grouud for changing my negative and critical attitude.
As for the Vestiges, I confess that the book simply irritated me
b)' the prodigious ignorance and thoroughly unscientific nabit
of mind manifested by the writer. If it had any influence on
me at all, it set me against evolution ; and the only review I
ever have qualms of conscience about, on the ground of need-
less savagery, is one I wrote on the Vesiiges while under that
influence. With respect to the Philosophie Zoologique, it is
no reproach to Lamarck to say that the discussion of the
species question in that work, whatever might be said for it in
1809, was miserably below the level of the knowledge of half a
century later. In that interval of time, the elucidation of the
structure of the lower animals and plants had given rise to
wholly new conceptions of their relations ; histology and em-
bryology, in the modern sense, had been created ; physiology
had been reconstituted ; the facts of distribution, geological
and geographical, had been prodigiously multiplied and re-
duced to order. To any biologist whose studies had carried
7

98 Thomas Henry Huxley

him beyond mere species-mongeriug, in 1850 one-half of
Lamarck's arguments were obsolete, and the other half erro-
neous or defective, in virtue of omitting to deal with the various
classes of evidence which had been brought to light since his
time. Moreover his one suggestion as to the cause of the grad-
ual modification of species — effort excited by change of condi-
tions—was, on the face of it, inapplicable to the whole vegetable
world. I do not think that any impartial judge who reads the
Philosophie Zoologiqiie now, and who afterwards takes up
Lyell's trenchant and effective criticism (published as far back
as 1830) will be disposed to allot to Lamarck a much higher
place in the establishment of biological evolution than that
which Bacou assigns to himself in relation to physical science
generally — buccinator tantum.''''

On the other hand, Huxley's friendship with Dar-
win and with lyvell began to make him less certain
about the fixity of species. He tells us that during his
first interview with Darwin, which occurred soon after
his return from the Rattlesnake, he

" expressed his belief in the sharpness of the lines of de-
marcation between natural groups and in the absence of transi-
tional forms, with all the confidence of youth aud imperfect
knowledge. I was not aware at that time that he had been
many years brooding over the species question ; and the hu-
morous smile which accompanied his gentle answer, that such
was not altogether his view, long hauuted and puzzled me."

An elaborate study of Lyell's works helped largely in
destroying this youthful confidence, and a letter written
by Lyell and quoted by Huxley in the chapter he com-
municated to Darwin's Life and Letters, states that in
April, 1856, " when Huxley, Hooker, and Wollaston
were at Darwin's last week they (all four of them) ran
a tilt against species; further I believe, than they are
prepared to go." Another quotation from Huxley's
essay on The Reception of the Origin of Species will make

SIR JOSEPH DALTON HOOKER

Natural Selection 99

it plain beyond all doubt that he was not a Darwinian
before Darwin.

"Thus, lookiug back into the past, it seems to me that my
own position of critical expectancy was just and reasonable,
and must have been taken up, on the same grounds, by many
other persons. If Agassiz had told me that the forms of life
which had successively tenanted the globe were the incarna-
tions of successive thoughts of the Deity ; and that He had
wiped out one set of these embodiments by an appalling geo-
logical catastrophe as soon as His ideas took a more advanced
shape, I found myself not only unable to admit the accuracy
of the deductions from the facts of palteontology, upon which
this astounding hypothesis was founded, but I had to confess
my want of means of testing the correctness of his explanation
of them. And besides that, I could by no means see what the
explanation explained. Neither did it help me to be told by an
eminent anatomist that species had succeeded one another in
time, in virtue of a ' continuously operative creational law.'
That seemed to me to be no more than saying that species had
succeeded one another in the form of a vote-catching resolu-
tion, with ' law ' to please the man of science and ' creational '
to draw the orthodox. So I took refuge in that thdtige
Skepsis which Goethe has so well defined ; and, reversing the
apostolic precept to be all things to all men, I usually defended
the tenability of the received doctrines when I had to do with
the transmutationists, and stood up for the possibility of
transmutation among the orthodox — thereby, no doubt, in-
creasing an already current, but quite undeserved, reputation
for needless combativeness."

What transformed Hiixle3''s views and the views of
his contemporaries who accepted Darwinism was not
so much the evidence in favour of evolution contained
in the Origin, as the illuminating doctrine of natural
selection which for the first time supplied naturalists
with a reasonable explanation of how evolution might
have come about, both in the animal and vegetable

lOO Thomas Henry Iluxlcy

kingdoms. As soon as this reason was provided them,
they turned to the store of facts within their own
knowledge, and rapidly arranged the evidence which
had been lurking only partly visible in favour of the
fact of evolution. It cannot be disputed that here and
there earlier writers than Darwin and Wallace had sug-
gested the possibility of natural selection acting upon
existing variations so as to cause survival of the fittest.
MacGillivray, the Scots naturalist, and the father of
Huxley's companion on the Rattlesnake, had published
suggestions which came exceedingly near to Darwin's
theory. In 1831 Mr. Patrick Matthew had published
a work on Naval Architecture and Timber, and in it had
stated the essential principle of the Darwinian doctrine
of struggle and survival. Still earlier, in 18 13, a Dr.
W. C. Wells, in a paper to the Royal Society on " A
White Female, Part of whose Skin Resembles that of a
Negro," had, as Darwin himself freely admitted, dis-
tinctly recognised the principle of natural selection —
but applied it only to the races of man, and to certain
characters alone. Finally, long before either of these,
Aristotle himself had written, in Physics, ii., 8 : " Why
are not the things which seem the result of design,
merely spontaneous variations, which, being useful,
have been preserved, while others are continually
eliminated as unsuitable ? ' ' None of these foreshadow-
ings were supported by lengthy evidence, nor worked
out into an elaborate theory; and it was not until Dar-
win had done this that we can say the birth of natural
selection really took place. Huxley writes :

" The suggestion that new species may result from the select-
ive action of external conditions upon the variations from their
specific type which individuals present,— and which we call
'spontaneous,' because we are ignorant of their causation,— is

Darwin's "Nunc Dimlttis " loi

as wholly unknown to the hiftorian of scientific ideas as it was
to biological specialists before 1858."

But that suggestion is the central idea of the origin of
species, and contains the quintessence of Darwinism.

Some weeks before the Origin was published, Darwan
wrote to Huxley, sending him a copy of the work, and
asking him for the names of eminent foreigners to
whom it should be sent. In the course of his letter he
wrote: " I shall be intensely curious to hear what ef-
fect the book produces on you," and it was clear that
he had no very confident expectation of a favourable
opinion. Huxley replied the day before the Origin
was published, saying that he had finished the volume,
and stating that it had completely convinced him of the
fact of evolution, and that he fully accepted natural
selection as a " true cause for the production of
species." Darwin, in a letter to Wallace, telling of
his doubts and- fears concerning the reception of his
book, had added the postscript : " I think I told you
l)efore that Hooker is a complete convert. If I can
convert Huxley, I shall be content." When he re-
ceived Huxley's letter he replied at once :

"Like a good Catholic who has received extreme unction, I
can now sing Nunc Diinittis. I should have been more than
contented with one quarter of what you have said. Exactly
fifteen mouths ago, when I first put pen to paper for this
volume, I had awful misgivings, and thought perhaps I had
deluded myself, like so many have done ; and I then fixed in
my mind three judges, on whose decision I determined ment-
ally to abide. The judges were Lyell, Hooker, and yourself.
It was this which made me so excessively anxious for your ver-
dict. I am now contented, and can sing my Nunc Diinitlis.'"

The effect of the new theor}' on Huxley's mind has
been expressed most fully and clearly by himself :

I02 Thomas Henry Huxley

" I imagine that most of mj' contemporaries who thought
seriously about the matter were very nmch iu my own state
of mind — inclined to say to Mosaists and Evolutionists, ' a
plague on both your houses ! ' and disposed to turn aside
from an interminable and apparently fruitless discussion to
labour in the fertile fields of ascertainable fact. And I may,
therefore, further suppose that the publication of the Darwin
and Wallace papers in 1858, and still more that of the Origin
in 1859, had the effect upon them of that of a flash of light
which, to a man who has lost himself in a dark night, suddenly
reveals a road which, whether it takes him straight home or
not, certainly goes his way. That whichwe were looking Jor
and could not find, was a hypothesis respecting the origin of
known organic forms, which assumed the operation of no
causes but such as could be proved to be actually at work.
We wanted, not to pin our faith to that or any other specula-
tion, but to get hold of clear and definite conceptions which,
could be brought face to face with facts and have their validity
tested. The Origin provided us with the working hypothesis
we sought. Moreover, it did us the immense service of freeing
us for ever from the dilemma — refuse to accept the creation ^
hypothesis, and what have you to propose that can be accepted
by any cautious reasoner? In 1857 I had no answer ready,
and I do not think that anyone else had. A year later, we
reproached ourselves with dulness for being perplexed by such
an enquiry. My reflection, when I first made myself master
of the central idea of the Origin was, ' how exceedingly
stupid not to have thought of that.' I suppose that Columbus's
companions said much the same when he made the egg to stand
on end. The facts of variability, of the struggle for existence,
of adaptation to conditions, were notorious enough ; but none
of us had suspected that the road to the heart of the species
problem lay through them, until Darwin and Wallace dispelled
the darkness, and the beacon-fire of the Origin guided the
benighted.

" Whether the particular shape which the doctrine of evolu-
tion, as applied to the organic world, took in Darwin's hands,
would prove to be final or not, was, to me, a matter of indifier-
ence. In my earliest criticisms of the Origin I ventured to
point out that its logical foundation was insecure so long as

A Working Hypothesis 103

experiments in selective breeding had not produced varieties
which were more or less infertile ; and that insecurity remains
up to the present time. But, with any and every critical doubt
which my sceptical ingenuity could suggest, the Darwinian
hypothesis remained incomparably more probable than the
creation hypothesis. And if we had none of us been able to
discern the paramount significance of some of the most patent
and notorious of natural facts, until they were, so to speak,
thrust under our noses, what force remained in the dilemma
—creation or nothing? It was obvious that, hereafter, the
probability would be immensely greater that the links of
natural causation w^ere hidden from our purblind eyes, than
that natural causation should be unable to produce all the
phenomena of nature. The only rational course for those who
had no other object than the attainment of truth, was to accept
' Darwinism ' as a working hypothesis, and see what could be
made of it. Either it would prove its capacity to elucidate the
fact of organic life, or it would break down under the strain.
This was surely the dictate of common sense, and for once
common-sense carried the day. The result has been that com-
plete volte-face of the whole scientific world which must seem
so surprising to the present generation. I do not mean to say
that all the leaders of biological science have avowed them-
selves Darwinians ; but I do not think that there is a single
zoologist, or botanist, or palaeontologist, among the multitude
of active workers of this generation, who is other than an
evolutionist profoundly influenced by Darwin's views. What-
ever may be the ultimate fate of the particular theory put forth
by Darwin, I venture to affirm that, so far as my knowledge
goes, all the ingenuity and all the learning of hostile critics
has not enabled them to adduce a solitary fact of which it can
be said that it is irreconcilable with the Darwinian theory.
In the prodigious variety and complexity of organic nature,
there are multitudes of phenomena which are not deducible
from any generalisation we have yet reached. But the same
may be said of every other class of natural objects. I believe
that astronomers cannot yet get the moon's motions into per-
fect accordance with the theory of gravitation."

These quotations make plain the historical fact that

I04 Thomas Henry Huxley

Huxle}'' was convinced of evolution becanse Darwin,
by his theory of natural selection, brought forward an
actual cause that could be seen in operation, and that
was competent to produce new species. As soon as the
" flash of light " came, it revealed to Huxley the vast
store of evidence that he had unconsciously accumu-
lated, and it set him at once to work collecting more
evidence. If we bear in mind the distinction between
evolution and natural selection, the well-known subse-
quent history of the relations between Huxley and
what was known popularl}^ as Darwinism becomes clear
and intelligible. From first to last he accepted evolu-
tion ; from first to last he accepted natural selection as
by far the most reasonable hypothesis that had been
brought forward, and as infinitel}- more in accordance
with the observed facts of nature than any theory of
the immediate action of supernatural creative power.
As time went on, and the influence of Darwin's theory
made evolution acceptable to a wider and wider range
of people, until it passed into the common knowledge
of the world, that confusion of which we have spoken
arose between evol ution and Darwin's particular theory.
And as knowledge grew, and the number of biologists
increased in the striking fashion of this last half-cent-
ur}^ while the evidence for evolution continued to in-
crease with an unexpected rapidit}-, ever}' detail of the
purely Darwinian theory became more and more sub-
jected to rigid scrutiny. Most educated people, unless
their education has been largely in an experimental
science, find difiiculty in understanding the relation in
the minds of naturalists between "authority" and
" knowledge." We do not kno7(\ for instance, that the
structure of the Medusae consists essentially of two
foundation-membranes, because Huxley, one of the

Knowledge and Authority 105

greatest authorities in anatomy that the world has
seen, told us that it was so. We know it because,
Huxley having told us that it was so, we are able at
any time with a microscope and dissecting needles to
observe the fact for ourselves. It is true, that unless we
are making a special studj^ of the Medusae we do not
repeat the observation in the case of so many different
forms of Medusae as Huxley studied ; but it is part of
our training to observe for ourselves in a sufficient
number of cases to test the correspondence between
statement and fact before we accept the generalisation
of any authority. And we learn, or at least have the
opportunity of learning, in the whole habit of our lives
as naturalists, to distinguish carefully between know-
ledge of which personal observation is an essential part,
and opinion or belief which may or may not be based
upon authority, but which in any case is devoid of the
corroboration of personal observation. When a piece
of new anatomical or physiological work is published
in a technical journal, it is read by a large number of
anatomists and physiologists, and if the work is ap-
parently of an important kind, bearing on the general
problems that even specialists have to follow, they all
at once set to work in their laboratories to make cor-
roborative dissections or experiments, and it is part of
every modern account of a biological discovery to tell
exactly the methods by which results were got, in order
that this process of corroboration may be set about
easily. The question as to whether or no natural
selection were the sole or chief cause, or indeed a cause
at all, of evolution is not yet, and perhaps never will be,
a matter of knowledge in the scientific sense. At the
most, we can see for ourselves only that selection does
bring about changes at least as great as the differences

io6 Thomas Henry Huxley

between natural species. The evidence for this we
have before our eyes, if we choose to see, on a stock
farm; in the breeding yards of any keeper of " fancy "
animals ; or in the nursery gardens of any florist. So
far, Huxley accepted the Darwinian principle as a defi-
nite contribution to knowledge ; and so far the whole
body of biologists has followed him. Beyond this the
truth of the Darwinian principle is a matter of inference
or judgment; of balancing probabilities and improba-
bilities. In multitude of counsellors there is said to be
wisdom, and what we learn from the counsellors of
biology all over the world is that some maintain that
natural selection is the only probable agency in effect-
ing evolution, and that it is competent to account for
all the changes which we know to have taken place ;
others hold that its probable influence has been over-
rated ; and others, again, think that it has been one of
the many causes that have brought about the kaleido-
scopic variety of organic nature. Huxley remained to
the last among those who distinguished in the clearest
way between natural selection as an exceedingly inge-
nious and probable hypothesis, and a proved cause; and
he was always careful, especially when he was writing
for or speaking in the presence of those who like him-
self accepted the fact of evolution as proven, to dis-
tinguish between this provisional hj-pothesis as to how
evolution had come about, and definite knowledge that
it had come about in this way. Two passages from
Huxley's writings, one written in i860 in the IVesf-
viinster Review, and the second written in 1893, in the
preface to the volume of his collected essays which
contained a reprint of the Westminster ^xWq\&, will make
plain the continuity of Huxley's attitude :

"There is no fault to be found with Mr. Darwin's method,

Unproved Issues 107

then ; but it is another question whether he has fulfilled all the
conditions imposed by that method. Is it satisfactorily proved,
in fact, that species may be originated by selection ? That
there is such a thing as natural selection ? That none of the
phenomena exhibited by species are inconsistent with the
origin of species in this way ? If these questions can be an-
swered in the affirmative, Mr. Darwin's view steps out of the
rank of hypotheses into those of proved theories ; but, so long
as the evidence at present adduced falls short of enforcing that
affirmation, so loug, to our minds, must the new doctrine be
content to remain among the former — an extremely valuable,
and in the highest degree probable, doctrine ; indeed, the only
extant hypothesis which is worth anything in a scientific point
of view ; but still a hypothesis, and not yet the theory of
species.

"After much consideration, and assuredly with no bias against
Mr. Darwin's views, it is our clear conviction that, as the end-
ence stands, it is not absolutely proven that a group of ani-
mals having all the characters exhibited by species in nature,
has ever been originated by selection, whether natural or arti-
ficial. Groups having the morphological character of species,
distinct and permanent races, in fact, have been so produced
over and over again ; but there is no positive evidence at
present that any group of animals has, by variation and select-
ive breeding, given rise to another group which was in the least
degree infertile with the first. Mr. Darwin is perfectly aware
of this weak point, and brings forward a multitude of ingenious
and important arguments to diminish the force of the object-
tion. We admit the value of these arguments to the fullest
extent ; nay, we will go so far as to express our belief that
experiments, conducted by a skilful physiologist, would very
probably obtain the desired production of mutually more or
less infertile breeds from a common stock in a comparatively
few years ; but still, as the case stands at present, this little
'rift within the lute' is not to be disguised or overlooked." —
( IVesimhister Review, i860.)

"We should leave a very wrong impression on the reader's
mind if we permitted him to suppose that the value of Darwin's
work depends wholly on the ultimate justification of the theor-
etical views which it contains. On the contrary, if they were

io8 Thomas Henry Huxley

disproved to-morrow, the book would still he the best of its
kiud — the most compendious statement of well-sifted facts
bearing on the doctrine of species that has ever appeared.
The chapters on variation, on the struggle for existence, on
instinct, on hybridism, on the imperfection of the geological
record, on geographical distribution, have not only no equals,
but, so far as our knowledge goes, no competitors, within the
range of biological literature. And viewed as a whole, we do
not believe that, since the publication of Von Baer's Researches
on Development, thirty years ago, any work has appeared
calculated to exert so large an influence, not only on the future
of biologv, but in extending the domination of science over
regions of thought into which she has, as yet, hardly pene-
trated."—(7/^/t/.)

" Those who take the trouble to read the essays published in
1859 and i860, will, I think, do me the justice to admit that my
zeal to secure fair play for Mr. Darwin did not drive me into
the position of a mere advocate ; and that, while doing justice
to the greatness of the argument, 1 did not fail to indicate its
weak points. I have never seen any reason for departing from
the position which I took up in these two essays ; and the
assertion which I sometimes meet with nowadays that I have
'recanted' or changed my opinions about- Mr. Darwin's views
is quite unintelligible to me.

" As I have said in the seventh essay, the fact of evolution is
to my mind sufRciently evidenced by palaeontology ; and I
remain of the opinion expressed in the second, that until select-
ive breeding is definitely proved to give rise to varieties infer-
tile with one another, the logical foundation of the theory of
natural selection is quite incomplete. We still remain very
much in the dark about the causes of variation ; the apparent
inheritance of acquired characters in some cases ; and the
struggle for existence within the organism, which probably lies
at the bottom of both these phenomena."— (1893, Preface.)

Final!}', when lie was awarded the Darwin Medal of
the Royal Societ3% on November 30, 1S94, in the course
of an address at the anniversary dinner of the Society,
he said, as reported in the Times next day :

The Darwin Medal 109

" I ani as much convinced now as I was thirty-four years ago
that the theory propounded by Mr. Darwin, I mean that which
he propounded — not that which has been reported to be his by
too many ill-instructed, both friends and foes — has never yet
been shewn to be inconsistent with any positive observations,
and if I may use a phrase which I know has been objected to,
and which I use in a totally different sense from that in which
it was first proposed by its first propounder, I do believe that
on all grounds of pure science it ' holds the field ' as the only
hypothesis at present before us which has a sound scientific
foundation. ... I am sincere!}' of opinion that the views
which were propounded by Mr. Darwin thirty-four 5"ears ago
may be understood hereafter as constituting an epoch in the
intellectual history of the human race. They will modify the
whole system of our thought and opinion, our most intimate
convictions. But I do not know, I do not think anybody
knows, whether the particular views he held will be hereafter
fortified by the experience of the ages which come after us.

. . Whether the particular form in which he has put be-
fore us the Darwinian doctrines may be such as to be destined
to survive or not, is more, I venture to think, than anybody is
capable at this present moment of saying."

Further details of Huxlej^'s relation to nattiral selec-
tion may be gained from an interesting chapter in Pro-
fessor Potilton's volume on Charles Darwin (Cassell
and Co., London, 1896).

CHAPTKR VII

THE BATTLE FOR EVOLUTION

Huxley's Prevision of the Battle — The Causes of the Battle —
The Times Review — Sir Richard Oweu attacks Darwinism
in the Edinburgh Review — Bishop Wilberforce attacks in
the Quarterly Revieiv — Huxley's Scathing Replies — The
British Association Debates at Oxford— Huxley and Wil-
berforce— Resume of Huxley's Exact Position with Regard
to Evolution and to Natural Selection.

WHEN Htixley wrote thanking Darwin for the
first copy of the Origin, he warned him of the
annoyance and abuse he might expect from those whose
opinions were too suddenly disturbed by the new ex-
position of evohition, and assured him of the strongest
personal support :

"I trust you will not allow yourself to be in any way dis-
gusted or annoyed by the considerable abuse and misrepre-
sentation which, unless I greatly mistake, is in store for you.
Depend upon it, you have earned the lasting gratitude of all
thoughtful men ; and as to the curs which will bark and yelp,
you must recollect that some of your friends, at any rate, are
endowed with an amount of combativeness which (though you
have often and justly rebuked it) may stand you in good stead.

" I am sharpening my claws and beak in readiness."

Huxley was absolutel}^ right in his prediction as to
the magnitude of the prejudices to be overcome before

no

The Need for " Beak and Claws" 1 1 1

evolution became accepted, and for the next thirty
3'ears of his hfe he was the leader in the battle for Dar-
winism. It was natural that the new view^s, especiall}-
in their extension to man himself, should arouse the
keenest opposition. To those of the present generation,
w^ho have grown up in an atmosphere impregnated b}-
the doctrine of descent, the position of the world in
i860 seems " older than a tale written in any book."
As w^e have tried to shew in the preceding chapter,
biological science was partially prepared ; the muta-
bility of species and the orderl}' succession of organic
life were in the air. But the application of the doctrine
to man came as a greater shock to civilised sentiment
than would have occurred a century earlier. It came
as a disaster even to the clearest and calmest intellects,
for it seemed to drag down to the dirt the nobility of
man. Out of the fierce flame of the French Rev^olution,
there had come purged and clean the conception of man
as an individual and soul. As this century advanced,
the conception of the dignity and worth of each indi-
vidual man, rich or poor, bond or free, had spread
more and more widely, bearing as its fruit the emanci-
pation of slaves, the spread of political freedom, the
amelioration of the conditions of the dregs of humanity,
the right of all to education, the possibility of universal
peace based on the brotherhood of man ; and all that
was best in philosophy and in political practice seemed
bound up with a lofty view of the unit of mankind.
Carlyle himself, to whom many of the freest and
noblest spirits in Europe were beginning to look as to
an inspired prophet, could see in it nothing but a
" monkey damnification of mankind." The dogmatic
world saw in it nothing but a deliberate and malicious
assault upon religion. The Church of England in

112 Thomas Henry Huxley

particular was begiuuiug to recov'er from a long period of
almost incredible supineness, and there was arising a
large body of clergy full of faith and zeal and good
works, but quite unacquainted with science, who
frankly regarded Darwin as Antichrist, and Huxle}'
and Tyndall as emissaries of the devil. Against evo-
lutionists there was left unused no weapon that ignor-
ant prejudice could find, whether that prejudice was
inspired by a loft}^ zeal for what it conceived to be the
highest interests of humanit}-, or by a crafty policy
which saw in the new doctrine a blow to the coming
renewed supremacy of the Church. To us, now, it
may seem that Huxlej- had " sharpened his beak and
claws " with the spirit of a gladiator rather than with
that of the mere defender of a scientific doctrine ; but
a very short stud}- of contemporary literature will con-
vince anyone that for a time the defenders of evolution
had to defend not only what they knew to be scientific
truth, but their personal and private reputation. The
new doctrine, like perhaps all the great doctrines that
have come into the world, brought not peace but a
sword, and had to be defended b}- the sword. Darwin
had not the kind of disposition nor the particular facul-
ties necessar\^ for a deadly contest of this kind ; he was
interested indeed above all things in convincing a few
leading naturalists of the truth of his opinions ; but,
that done, he would have been contented to continue
his own work quieth% in absolute carelessness as to
what the world in general thought of him. Huxley,
on the other hand, was incapable of restraining himself
from propagating what he knew to be the truth ; his
reforming missionar}' spirit was not content simply
with self-defence; it drove him to be a bishop in parti-
bus infideliiun.

The Times Review 1 1

a

By a curious and interesting accident, Huxle}' had
the opportunity of beginning his propagandisra by
writing the first great review of The Origin of Species in
the Times, at that period without question the leading
journal in the world. Huxley's own account of this
happy chance is given in DarivhV s Life and Letters,
vol, ii.

"The Origin was sent to Mr. Lucas, one of the staff of the
Times writers at that day, iu what I suppose was the ordinary
course of business. Mr. Lucas, though au excellent journalist,
and at a later period editor of Once a Week, was as innocent
of any knowledge of science as a babe, and bewailed himself to
an acquaintance on having to deal with such a book, where-
upon he was recommended to ask me to get him out of his
difficulty, and he applied to me accordingly, explaining, how-
ever, that it would be necessary for him formally to adopt any-
thing I might be disposed to write, by prefacing it with two or
three paragraphs of his own.

" I was too anxious to seize on the opportunity thus offered
of giving the book a fair chance with the multitudinous readers
of the Times to make any difficulty about conditions ; and be-
ing then very full of the subject, I wrote the article faster, I
think, than I ever wrote anything in my life, and sent it to
Mr, Lucas, who duly prefixed his opening sentences. When
the article appeared, there was much speculation as to its
authorship. The secret leaked out in time, as all secrets will,
but not by my aid ; and then I used to derive a good deal of
innocent amusement from the vehement assertions of some of
my more acute friends, that they knew it was mine from the
first paragraph." " As the Times some years since referred to
my connection with the review, I suppose there will be no
breach of confidence in the publication of this little history."

This review was one of the few favourable notices,
and naturally it delighted Darwin greatly. He wrote
to Hooker about it : " Have j'ou seen the splendid
essay and notice of my book in the Times f I cannot
avoid a strong suspicion that it is by Huxley ; but I

114 Thomas Henry Huxley

have never heard that he wrote in the Times. It will
do grand service." On the same day, writing to Hux-
ley himself, he said of the review :

"It included au eulogium of me which quite touched nie,
although I am not vaiu euough to thiuk it all deserved. The
author is a literary mau aud a German scholar. He has read
my book attentively; but, what is very remarkable, it seems
that he is a profound naturalist. He knows my barnacle book
and appreciates it too highly. Lastly, he writes aud thinks
with quite uncommon force and clearness ; aud, what is even
still rarer, his writing is seasoned with most pleasant wit. We
all laughed heartily over some of the sentences. . . . Who
can it be? Certainly I should have said that there was only
one man in England who could have written this essay, and
that you were the man ; but I suppose that I am wrong, and that
there is some hidden genius of great calibre ; for how could you
influence Jupiter Olympus and make him give you three and a
half columns to pure science? The old fogies will think the
world will come to an end. Well, whoever the man is, he has
done great service to the cause."

The essay in the Times was followed shortly after-
wards by a " Friday Evening Discourse " in i860 on
" Species, Races, and their Origin," in which Huxlej-,
addressing a cultivated audience, laid the whole weight
of his brilliant scientific reputation on the side of evo-
lution. Next, in April, i860, he published a long
article in the Westminster Review, then a leading organ
of advanced opinion, on The Origin of Species, some quo-
tations from which article were made in the last chap-
ter. Apart from its strong support of the doctrine of
evolution, its whole-hearted praise of Darwin's achieve-
ments, and the clear way in which, while it show^ed
the value of natural selection as the only satisfac-
tory hypothesis in the field, it gave reasons for regard-
ing it strictly as an hypothesis, the review is specially

The Edinburgh Review 1 1 5

interesting as a contrast to reviews which appeared
about the same time in the Edinburgh Rcvieiv and in
the Quarterly. Both these were not only exceedingly
iinfavourable, but were written in a spirit of personal
abuse singularly unworthy of their authors and still
more of their subject. The review in the Edhibiirgh
had come as a particularly great shock to Darwin,
Huxley, and their friends. Sir Richard Owen, in
many ways, was at that time the most distinguished
anatomist in England. He had been an ardent follower
of Cuvier, and in England had carried on the palseon-
tological work of the great Frenchman. He was a
personal friend of the court, a well-known man in the
best society, and in many ways a worthy upholder of
the best traditions of science. In the particular matter
of species, he was known to be by no means a firm sup-
porter of the orthodox views. When Darwin's paper
was read at the lyinnsean Society, and afterwards when
the Origin was published, the verdict of Owen was
looked to wdth the greatest interest b}^ the general
public. For a time he wavered, and even expressed
himself of the opinion that he had already in his pub-
lished works included a considerable portion of Dar-
win's views. But two things seemed to have influenced
him : First, Wilberforce, the Bishop of Oxford, and
Sedgwick and Whewell, the two best-known men at
Cambridge, urged him to stamp once for all, as he only
could do, upon this " new and pernicious doctrine."
Secondly, combined with his great abilities, he had
the keenest personal interest in his own position as the
leader of English science, and had no particular friend-
ship for men or for views that seemed likely to threaten
his own supreme position. In a ver}^ short time he
changed from being neutral, with a tendency in favour

ii6 Thomas Henry Huxley

of the new views, to l)eing a bitter opponent of them.
In scientific societies and in London generall3^ naturally
enough he constantly came across the younger scientific
men, such as Huxley and Hooker, who had declared for
Darwin, and he made the irretrievable mistake of for a
time attempting to disguise his opposition while he was
writing the most bitter of all the articles against Dar-
winism. That appeared in the Edinburgh Review in
April, i860, and the range of knowledge it displayed,
and the form of arguments employed, naturally enough
betrayed the secret of its authorship, although Owen
for very long attempted to conceal his connection with
it. Darwin, who had the most unusual generosity to-
wards his opponents, found this review too much for
him. Writing to Lyell soon after its publication, he
said :

"I have just read the Edinburgh, which, without doubt is

by . It is extremely maliguaut, clever, and, I fear, will be

very damaging. He is atrociously severe on Huxley's lecture,
and very bitter against Hooker. So we three enjoyed it to-
gether. Not that I really enjoyed it, for it made me uncom-
fortable for one night ; but I have quite got over it to-day. It
requires much study to appreciate all the bitter spite of many
of the remarks against me ; indeed I did not discover all myself.
It scandalously misrepresents many parts. He misquotes some
passages, altering words within inverted commas. ... It

is painful to be hated in the intense degree with which

hates me."

As Owen was still alive when this letter was published
in Darzi'iu' s Life, the authorship of the review w^as not
actually mentioned; but it is necessary to mention it, as
it justifies the sternness with which Huxley exposed
Owen on an occasion shortly to be described. The
review in the Quarterly was written by Wilberforce, the
Bishop of Oxford, in July, i860, and almost at once

Criticism in the Quarterly 1 1 7

the authorship of it became known to Darwin's friends.
In connection with this, Huxley wrote in 1887, in Dar-
win'' s Life and Letters :

" I doubt if there was any man then living who had a better
right (than Darwin) to expect that anything he might choose
to say on such a question as the Origin of Species would be
listened to with profound attention, and discussed with respect.
And there was certainly no man whose personal character
should have afforded a better safeguard against attacks, instinct
with malignity and spiced with shameless impertinences. Yet
such was the portion of one of the kindest and truest men that
it was ever my good fortune to know ; and years had to pass
away before misrepresentation, ridicule, and denunciation
ceased to be the most notable constituents of the majority of
the multitudinous criticisms of his work which poured from
the press. I am loth to rake up any of these ancient scandals
from their well-deserved oblivion ; but I must make good a
statement which may seem overcharged to the present genera-
tion, and there is no piece justificative more apt for the purpose
or more worthy of such dishonour than the article in the
Quarterty Revieiv for July, i860. Since Lord Brougham as-
sailed Dr. Young, the world has seen no such specimen of the
insolence of a shallow pretender to a Master in Science as this
remarkable production, in which one of the most exact of
observers, most cautious of reasoners, and most candid of ex-
positors, of this or any other age, is held up to scorn as a
' flighty ' person who endeavours to ' prop up his utterly rotten
fabric of guess and speculation,' and whose ' mode of dealing
with nature ' is reprobated as ' utterly dishonourable to natural
science.' And all this high and mighty talk, which would
have been indecent in one of Mr. Darwin's equals, proceeds
from a writer whose want of intelligence, or of conscience, or
of both, is so great, that, by way of an objection to Mr, Dar-
win's views, he can ask, 'Is it credible that all favourable
varieties of turnips are tending to become men ' ; who is so
ignorant of palaeontology that he can talk of the ' flowers
and fruits' of the plants of the carboniferous epoch; of com-
parative anatomy, that he can gravely aflfirm the poison ap-
paratus of venomous snakes to be ' entirely separate from the

ii8 Thomas Henry Huxley

ordinarj' laws of animal life, and peculiar to themselves ' ;
of the rudiments of physiology, that he cau ask, 'what ad-
vantage of life could alter the shape of the corpuscles into
which the blood can be evaporated ? ' Nor does the reviewer
fail to flavour this outpouring of incapacity with a little stimu-
lation of the odium theologicu})!. Some inkling of the history
of the conflicts between astronomy, geology, and theology
leads him to keep a retreat open by the proviso that he cannot
' consent to test the truth of Natural Science by the Word of
Revelation,' but for all that he devotes pages to the exposition
of his conviction that Mr. Darwin's theory ' contradicts the
revealed relation of the creation to its Creator,' and is ' incon-
sistent with the fulness of His glory.' "

In a footnote to this passage, Huxley wrote that he
was not aware when writing these lines that the author-
ship of the article had been avowed publicly. He adds,
however :

"Confession unaccompanied by penitence, however, aflfords
no ground for mitigation of judgment ; and the kindliness
with which Mr. Darwin speaks of his assailant. Bishop Wil-
berforce, is so striking an exemplification of his singular
gentleness and modesty, that it rather increases one's indigna-
tion against the presumption of his critic."

As a matter of fact Wilberforce was a man of no par-
ticular information in letters or in philosophy, and his
knowledge of science was of the vaguest : a little
natural histor}^ picked up from Gosse, the naturalist
of the seashore, in the course of a few days' casual
acquaintance at the seaside, and some pieces of ana-
tomical facts with which he was provided, it is sup-
posed, by Owen, for the purposes of the review. But
he bore a great name, and misused a great position ; he
was a man of facile intelligence, smooth, crafty, and
popular, and in this case he was convinced that he was
doing the best possible for the great interests of religion

The Public and Darwinism 119

by authoritativel}^ denouncing a man whose character
he was incapable of realising, and on whose work he
was incompetent to pronounce an opinion. Against
an enemy of this kind, Huxley was implacable and re-
lentless. He was constitutionally incapable of tolerat-
ing pretentious ignorance, and he had realised from the
first that there could be no question of giving and
taking quarter from persons who were more concerned
to suppress doctrines they conceived to be dangerous
than to examine into their truth. On the other hand,
much as Huxlej^ disliked Owen's devious ways, and
although in after life there occurred many and severe
differences of opinion between Huxley and Owen,
Huxley had a sincere respect for much of Owen's
anatomical and palaeontological work, and when, in
1894, Owen's Life was published, one of the most inter-
esting parts of it was a long, fair, and appreciative re-
view by Huxley of Owen's contributions to knowledge.
The middle of i860, however, was not a time for
Huxley, in his capacity as Darwin's chief defender, to
make truce with the enemy. In England a certain
number of well-known scientific men had given a gen-
eral support to Darwinism. From France, Germany,
and America there had come some support and a good
deal of cold criticism, but most people were simmering
with disturbed emotions. The newspapers and the
reviews were full of the new subject; political speeches
and sermons were filled with allusions to it. Wherever
educated people talked the conversation came round to
the question of evolution. ^Vere animals and plants
the results of special creations, or were they, including
man, the result of the gradual transformations of a few
simple primitive types evolving under the stress of some
such force as Darwin's natural selection ?| To many

I20 Thomas Henry Huxley

people it seemed to be a choice between a world with
God and a woild without God ; and the accredited de-
fenders of religion gathered every force of argument,
of misrepresentation, conscious and unconscious, of re-
spectability, and of prejudice to crush once forgh the
\ obnoxious doctrine and its obnoxious supportersj In
the autumn of that year ;,t fell that the meeting of the
\ British Association, then coming into prominence as
the annual parliament of the sciences, was to be held
at Oxford. It was inevitable that evolution should be
debated formall}^ and informally in the sessions of the
Association, and it must have seemed to the orthodox
that there, in that beautiful city, its air vibrant with
tinkling calls to faith, its halls and libraries crowded
with the devout and the learned, its history and tradi-
tions alike calling on all to defend the old fair piety, in
such an uncongenial air, /the supporters of evolution
must be overwhelmecL Almost the whole w^eight ot"
the attack had to be resisted by Huxley. In the vari-
ous sectional meetmgs he had combat after combat with
professors and clerics. Of these dialectic fights the
most notable were one with Owen on the anatomical
structure of the brain, and another with Wilberforce
upon the general question of evolution. Owen con-
tended that there were anatomical differences not
merely of degree but of kind between the brain of man
and the brain of the highest ape, and his remarks were
accepted by the audience as a complete and authorita-
tive blow to the theory of descent. Huxley at once met
Owen with a direct and flat contradiction, and pledged
his reputation to justifj' his contradiction with all
due detail on a further occasion. As a matter of fact,
he did justify the contradiction, and no anatomist would
now dream of attempting the support of the proposition

The Oxford Debate 1 2 1

rashly made b}- Owen; but, at the time, the position of
Owen and the sympathies of the audience took away
much of their effect from Huxley's words. Two days
later, Wilberforce, in a scene of considerable excitement,
made a long, eloquent, and declamatory speech against
ev^olution and against Huxley. yTFrom the incomplete
reports of the debate that were published, it is difficult
to gain a very clear idea of the Bishop's speech ; but it
is certain that it was eloquent and facile, and that it
appealed strongly to the religious prejudices of the
majority of the audience. J He ended by a gibe which,
under ordinary circumstances, might have pas.sed simply
as the rude humour of a popular orator, but which in
that electric atmosphere stung Huxley into a retort that
has become historical. He asked Huxle_v whether he
was related by his grandfather's or grandmother's side
to an ape, Huxle}- replied :

"I asserted, and I repeat, that a man has no reason to be
ashamed of having an ape for his grandfather. If there were
an ancestor whom I should feel shame in recalling, it would be
a Dian, a man of restless and versatile intellect, who, not con-
tent with an equivocal success in his own sphere of activity,
plunges into scientific questions with which he has no real
acquaintance, only to obscure them by an aimless rhetoric, and
distract the attention of his hearers from the real point at issue
by eloquent digressions, and skilled appeals to religious
prejudice."

/_An eye-witness has told the present writer that Hux-
ley's speech produced little effect at the time. In the
minds of those of the audience best qtialified to weigh
biological arguments, there was little doubt but that he
had refuted Owen, and simply dispelled the vaporotis ef-
fusions of the Bishop; but the majority of the audience
retained the old convictiotis^Y The combat was removed
to a wider tribunal. From that time forwards Huxle\%

\

122 Thomas Henry Huxley

by a series of essa5S, addresses, and investigations, con-
tinued almost to the end of his life, tried to convince,
and succeeded in convincing, the intellectual world. At
the risk of vvearj'ing by repetition we shall again insist
upon the side of Darwinism that Huxley fought for and
triumphed for.

Long before the time of Darwin and Huxley, almost
at the beginning of recorded thought, philosophers
busied themselves with the wonderful diversitj- of the
living world and with speculations as to how it had as-
sumed its present form. From the earliest times to this
century, theories as to the living world fell into one or
other of two main groups. The key-note of one group
was the fixitj' of species : the belief that from their first
appearance species were separate, independent entities,
one never springing from another, new species never
arising by the modification in different directions of
descendants of already existing species. The key-note
of the other group of theories was the idea of progress-
ive change : that animals and plants as they passed
along the stream of time were continually being moulded
by the forces surrounding them, and that the farther
back the mind could go in imagination the fewer and
simpler species would be ; until, in the first beginning,
all the existing diverse kinds of living creatures would
converge to a single point. It may be that, on the
whole, the idea of fixity prev^ailed more among thinkers
with a religious bias; but for the most part the theories
were debated independently of the tenets of any faith.
Christian or other. There were sceptical defenders of
fixity and religious upholders of evolution. However,
in Christian countries, from the time of the Reformation
onwards, a change in this neutrality of religion to
theories of the living world took place. As Pascal

History of Evolution 12

o

prophesied, Protestantism rejected the idea of an in-
fallible Church in favour of the idea of an infallible
book, and, because it happened that this book included
an early legend of the origin of the world in a form ap-
parently incompatible with evolution, Protestantism
and, to a lesser and secondary extent, Catholicism, as-
sumed the position that there was no place for evolution
in a Christian philosophy. At the end of last century,
and up to the middle of this century, the problem was
not raised in any acute form. The chief anatomists
and botanists were occupied with the investigation and
discovery of facts, and, in an ordinary way, without
taking any particular trouble about it, accepted more
or less loosely the idea that species were fixed. Now
and then an evolutionist propounded his views ; but,
as a rule, he supported them with a knowledge of facts
very much inferior to that possessed by the more ortho-
dox school. Then came Herbert Spencer, reasserting
evolution in the old broad spirit, not merel}^ in its ap-
plication to species, but as the guiding principle of the
whole universe from the integrations of nebulae into
systems of suns and planets to the transformations of
chemical bodies. Before his marvellous generalisations
had time to grip biologists, there came Darwin ; and
Darwin brought two things: first, a re-statement of the
fact of evolution as applied to the living world, sup-
ported by an enormous body of evidence, new and old,
presented with incomparably greater force, clearness,
patience, and knowledge than had ever been seen be-
fore ; and, second, the exposition of the principle of
natural selection as a mechanism which might have
caused, and probably did cause, evolution.

Huxley, as has been shewn, like many other anato-
mists, was ready for the general principle of evolution.

124 Thomas Henry Huxley

In fact, so far as it concerned the great independent
t}'pes which he believed to exist among animals, he
was more than prepared for it. Let us take a single
definite example of his position. In his work on the
Medusas, he had shewn how a large number of creat-
ures, at first sight diverse, were really modifications
of a single great type, and he used language which,
now that all zoologists accept evolution in the fullest
way, requires no change to be understood :

"What has now beeu advanced will, perhaps, be deemed
evidence sufficient to demonstrate, — first, that the organs of
these various families are traceable back to the same point in
the way of development ; or, secondly, when this cannot be
done, that they are connected by natural gradations with or-
gans which are so traceable ; in which case, according to the
principles advanced in 57, the various organs are homologous,
and the families have a real affinity to one another and should
form one group. ... It appears, then, that these five fam-
ilies are by no means so distinct as has hitherto beeu supposed,
but that they are members of one great group, organised upon
one simple and uniform plan, and, even in their most complex
and aberrant forms, reducible to the same type. And I may
add, finally, that on this theory it is by no means difficult to
account for the remarkable forms presented by the Medusae in
their young state. The Medusre are the most perfect, the
most individualised animals of the series, and it is only in
accordance with what very generally obtains in the animal
kingdom, if, in their early condition, they approximate towards
the simplest forms of the group to which they belong."

Such words, written before 1849, only differ from
those that would have been written by a convinced
evolutionist by a hair's breadth. But Huxley was not
an evolutionist then : it was Darwin's work, contain-
ing a new exposition of evolution and the new principle
of natural .selection, that convinced him, not of natural
selection but of evolution. At Oxford, in i860, it was

Triumph of Darwinism 125

for evolution, and not for natural selection, that he
spoke ; and throughout his life afterwards, as he ex-
pressed it, it was this " ancient doctrine of evolution,
rehabilitated and placed upon a sound scientific founda-
tion, since, and in consequence of, the publication of
The Origin of Species'' that furnished him with the chief
inspiration of his work. The clear accuracy of his
original judgment upon Darwin's work has been abun-
dantly justified by subsequent history. Since 1859 the
case for ev^olution has become stronger and stronger
until it can no longer be regarded as one of two possible
hypotheses in the field, but as the ovXy view credible
to those who have even a moderate acquaintance with
the facts. In 1894, thirty years after the famous meet-
ing at Oxford, the British Association again met in that
historic town. The President, Lord Salisbury, a de-
vout Churchman and with a notably critical intellect,
declared of Darwin :

" He has, as a matter of fact, disposed of the doctrine of the
immutability of species. . . . Few now are found to doubt
that animals separated by differences far exceeding those that
distinguish what we know as species have yet descended from
common ancestors."

Huxley, in replying to the address, used the following
words :

"As he noted in the Presidential Address to which they had
just listened with such well deserved interest, he found it
stated, on what was then and at this time the highest authority
for them, that as a matter of fact the doctrine of the immuta-
bility of species was disposed of and gone. He found that few
were now found to doubt that animals separated by differences
far exceeding those which they knew as species were yet de-
scended from a common ancestry. Those were their proposi-
tions ; those were the fundamental principles of the doctrine
of evolution."

126 Thomas Henry Huxley

On the other hand, Huxley all through his life,
while holding that natural selection was by far the
most probable hypothesis as to the mode in which evo-
lution had come about, maintained that it was only a
hypothesis, and, unlike evolution, not a proved fact.
In 1863, in a course of lectures to workingmen, he
declared :

" I really believe that the alternative is either Darwinism or
nothing, for I do not know of any rational conception or theory
of the organic universe which has any scientific position at all
beside Mr. Darwin's. . . . But 3'ou must recollect that
when I say I think it is either Mr. Darwin's hypothesis or
nothing ; that either we must take his view, or look upon the
whole of organic nature as an enigma, the meaning of which
is wholly hidden from us ; you must understand that I mean
that I accept it provisionally, in exactly the same way as I
accept any other hypothesis."

In 1878 he wrote :

" How far natural selection suffices for the production of
species remains to be seen. Few can doubt that, if not the
whole cause, it is a very important factor in that operation ;
and that it must play a great part in the sorting out of varieties
into those which are transitory and those which are per-
manent."

The diflSculty in accepting natural selection as more
than a hypothesis is simply that we have no experi-
mental knowledge of its being able to produce the
mutual infertility which is so striking a character of
species. This difficulty is, in the first place, the diffi-
culty of proving a negative. It might be possible to
prove that its operation actually does produce species ;
it will always be impossible to prove that, in the past,
natural selection, and no other known or unknown

Natural Selection Still Unproved 127

agency or combination of agencies, had a share in the
process. All naturalists are now agreed that, as a
matter of historical fact, it was the propounding of
natural selection by Darwin that led to the acceptance
of evolution, to the fact that evolution " takes its place
alongside of those accepted truths which must be
reckoned with by philosophers of all schools." The
difficulty as to natural selection still exists, and there
is no better way to express it than in Huxley's words,
written in the early sixties :

" But, for all this, our acceptance of the Darwinian hypothesis
must be provisional so long as one link in the chain of evidence
is wanting ; and, so long as all the animals and plants certainly
produced by selective breeding from a common stock are
fertile with one another, that link will be wanting ; for, so
long, selective breeding will not be proved to be competent to
do all that is required of it to produce natural species. ... I
adopt Mr. Darwin's hypothesis, therefore, subject to the pro-
duction of proof that physiological species may be produced by
selective breeding ; just as a physical philosopher may accept
the undulatory theory of light, subject to the proof of the ex-
istence of the hypothetical ether ; or as the chemist adopts the
atomic theory, subject to the proof of the existence of atoms ;
and for exactly the same reasons, namel)', that it has an im-
mense amount of prima facie probability ; that it is the only
means at present within reach of reducing the chaos of observed
facts to order ; and, lastly, that it is the most powerful instru-
ment of investigation which has been presented to the natural-
ists since the invention of the natural system of classification,
and the commencement of the systematic study of embryology."
— Man's Place in Nature, p. 149.*

* Further details on the subject of this chapter may be ob-
tained in Clodd's excellent volume. Pioneers of Evoliition ,
where an account of the history of the idea of evolution from
the earliest times is given ; and in Poulton's Charles Darivin
and the Theory of Natural Selection, where there is a particu-
larly valuable chapter upon Huxley's relation to Darwinism.

CHAPTER VIII

VERTEBRATE ANATOMY

The Theory of the Vertebrate Skull — Goethe, Okeu, Cuvier,
and Owen — Huxley Defends Goethe — His Owu Contri-
butions to the Theory — The Classification of Birds — Hux-
ley Treats them as "Extinct Animals " — Geographical
Distribution — Sclater's Regions — Huxley's Suggestions.

WE have seen that sotue of the most important of
the contributions made by Huxley to zoologi-
cal knowledge were in the field of the lower animals,
especially of those marine forms for the study of which
he had so great opportunities on the Rattlesnake. A
great bulk of his zoological work, however, related to
the group of back-boned animals. These, by their
natural aflSnities and anatomical structure, are more
closely related to man, and, as Htixley began his scien-
tific work as a medical student, the groundwork of all
his knowledge was study of the anatomy and physiology
of man. Moreover, throughout the greater part of his
working life, he had more to do with the extinct forms
of life. The vertebrate animals, from the great facility
for preservation which their hard skeleton presents, as
well as from the extremely important anatomical char-
acters of the skeleton, bulk more largely in the study
of palaeontology than does any other group. In each of

128

Theory of the Vertebrate Skull 129

the great groups of vertebrate animals, in fishes, am-
phibia, reptiles, birds, and mammals, Huxley did im-
portant work. Much of this is embodied in his treatise
on Vertebrate Anatomy, but to some particular parts of
it special attention may now be directed, as much be-
cause these serve as excellent examples of his method
of work as because of their intrinsic importance.

The skull is the most striking feature in the skeleton
of vertebrate animals, and to the theory and structure
of the vertebrate skull Huxley paid special attention,
and his views and summary of the views of others form
the basis of our modern knowledge. This work was
put before the public in the course of a series of lectures
on Comparative Anatomy given in 1863, while Huxley
was Hunterian Professor at the Royal College of Sur-
geons, and the beginnings of it were contained in a
Croonian lecture to the Royal vSociety in 1858.

The theory of the skull which held the field was
known as the vertebral theory. The great bulk of the
nervous S3^stem of vertebrate animals consists of a mass
of tissue lying along the dorsal line of the bod}^ and
enclosed in a cartilaginous or bony sheath. The nerve
tissue is the brain and spinal cord ; the sheath is the skull
in front and the vertebral column along the greater part
of the length of the animal. The brain may be taken
simply as an anterior portion of the nerve mass, corre-
sponding in a general way to an expansion of the spinal
cord in the region of the anterior limbs and an expan-
sion in the region of the hind limbs, the latter indeed
having recently been shown in some extinct creatures
to surpass the brain in size. In a similar simple
fashion the skull may be taken as an expanded anterior
part of the vertebral column, serving as an expanded
box for the brain, just as in the regions of the pectoral

130 Thomas Henry Huxley

and pelvic expansions of the cord there are similar ex-
pansions of the surrounding bony case. We know
now, from greater knowledge of its embr3'ological
development, that the brain contains structures quite
peculiar to itself, and differs from the spinal cord
in kind as well as in size; but, at the same time, when
the vertebral theory of the skull was inaugurated, em-
bryological knowledge and the importance of its re-
lation to anatomical structure were less considered.
What Huxley did was to show that the skull, in its
mode of origin and real nature, was not merely an ex-
panded portion of the vertebral column, but that it
differed from it in kind.

The hypothesis of the vertebral structure of the skull
was due both to Goethe, the great German poet, and
Oken, a most able but somewhat mystic German anato-
mist. An attempt had been made by a well-known
Knglish anatomist to cast on Goethe the stigma of
having tried to rob Oken of the credit for this theory.
Huxley set that matter finally at rest, disproving and
repelling with indignation the unworthy suggestion.
Oken gave out his theory in 1807, and described how it
had been first suggested to his mind by the accident of
picking up a dried and battered sheep's skull, in which
the apparent vertebral structure was very obvious, as,
indeed, anyone may see at a glance. It was in 1820,
long after the theory had been made current, that the
poet first publicly narrated that in a similar way he had
long before come to the same conclusion ; but Huxley
was able to show that, although announcing it later,
Goethe had in reality anticipated the anatomist. A
passage occurs in a letter to a friend, of a date in 1790,
which admits of no doubt. " By the oddest happy
chance, my servant picked up a bit of an animal's skull

Goethe and Oken 131

in the Jews' cemetery at Venice, and, by way of a joke,
held it out to me as if he were offering me a Jew's
skull. I have made a great step in the formation of
animals." It is an interesting trait in Huxley's char-
acter, to find him zealous in defence of the reputation
of a great man, even although that man had been dead
more than half a century; bat it may be added that his
just zeal was at least stimulated by the fact that the
maligner of Goethe was Owen, the conduct of whom,
with regard to Darwin and Huxley, Huxley had had
just reason for resenting.

The theory, then, which had dropped stillborn from
Goethe, but which Oken developed, was simply that
the skull consisted of a series of expanded vertebrae.
Each vertebra consists of a basal piece or centrum, the
anterior and posterior faces of which are closely applied
to the face of an adjoining vertebra, and of a bony arch
or ring which encloses and protects the nervous cord.
Oken supposed that there were four such vertebrae in
the skull, the centra being firmly fused and the arches
expanded to form the dome of the skull. Quite cor-
rectly, he divided the skull into four regions, corre-
sponding to what he called an ear vertebra, at the back,
through which the auditory nerves passed ; a jaw ver-
tebra, in the sphenoidal region, through which the
nerves to the jaws passed ; an eye vertebra in front,
pierced by the optic nerves, and again in front a nose
vertebra, the existence of which he doubted at first.
Quite rightly, he discriminated between the ordinary
bones of the skull and the special structures surrounding
the inner ear which he declared to be additions derived
from another source. So far it cannot be doubted that
the vertebral theory made a distinct advance in our
knowledge of the skull. It was to a certain extent,

132 Thomas Henry Huxley

however, thrown into disrepute by various fantastic the-
ories with which Oken surrounded it. Later on, Cuvier
removed from it these wilder excrescences, and ampli-
fied the basis of observation upon which the underlying
theory of the unit}' of t5'pe of the skull throughout the
vertebrates was based. Cuvier, however, came to re-
ject the theor}', except so far as it applied to the pos-
terior or occipital segment of the skull. Later on,
Owen resuscitated the theory, first throwing doubt on
the merit of Goethe, and then suggesting that Oken,
instead of relying on the observed facts, had deduced
the whole theory from his own imagination. Owen,
although he made no new contribution to fact or theory
in this matter, practically claimed the whole credit of it
as a scientific h5'pothesis.

When Huxley took up the subject, the position was
that the vertebral theory was in full possession of the
field, under the auspices of Owen. Huxley began
afresh from observed facts. The first object of his in-
vestigation was to settle once for all the question as to
whether the skulls of all vertebrates were essentially
modifications of the same type. He took in succession
the skulls of man, sheep, bird, turtle, and carp, and
.showed that in all these there were to be distinguished
the same four basi-cranial regions : the basi-occipital,
basi-sphenoid, pre-sphenoid, and ethmoid. These were
essentially identical with the centra of the four verte-
brae of Oken. Similarl}^ he showed the composition
of the lateral and dorsal walls, proving the essential
identity of the structures involved and of their rela-
tions to the nerve exits in the great types he had
chosen. In the series of lectures delivered before the
College of Surgeons, he extended his observations to a
much larger series of vertebrates, and substantiall}' laid

Owen and Oken 133

down the main lines of our knowledge of the skull. In
two important respects his statements were not merely
a codification of existing knowledge, but an important
extension of it. He distinguished the different modes
in which the jaws may be suspended to the skull, and
established for these different kinds of suspensoria the
names which have ever since been employed. He
proved clearly what had been suggested by Oken, that
the region of the ear is a lateral addition to the skull,
and he distinguished in it three bones, his names for
which have since become the common property of anat-
omists. Finally, he made it plain beyond any possible
doubt that the skulls of all vertebrates were built upon
a common plan.

Having established the facts, he proceeded to enquire
into the theory. There was now a new method for in-
vestigating such problems, the method of embryology,
which, practically, had not been available to Oken, and
of which neither Cuvier nor Owen had made proper use.
By putting together the investigations of a number of
embryologists, by adding to these himself, and, lastly,
by interpreting the facts which his investigations into
comparative anatomy had brought to light, he shewed
that the vertebral theory could not be maintained. He
shewed, by these methods, that, though both skull and
vertebral column are segmented, the one and the other,
after an early stage, are fashioned on lines so different
as to exclude the possibility of regarding the details of
each as mere modifications of a common type. " The
spinal column and the skull start from the same primi-
tive condition, whence they immediately begin to
diverge." " It may be true to say that there is a
primitive identity of structure between the spinal or
vertebral column and the skull ; but it is no more true

134 Thomas Henry Huxley

that the adult skull is a modified vertebral column than
it would be to affirm that the vertebral colunui is a
modified skull." Taking the embryological facts, he
shewed that the skull arose out of elements quite differ-
ent from those of the vertebral column. The notochord
alone is common to both. The skull is built up of
longitudinal cartilaginous pieces, now known as the
'* parachordals" and " trabeculae," of sense capsules
enclosing the nose and ear, and of various roofing bones.
In the historical development of the skull three grades
become apparent ; a primitive stage, as seen in Amphi-
oxus, where there is nothing but a fibrous investment
of the nervous structures ; a cartilaginous grade, as
seen in the skate or shark, where the skull is formed
of cartilage, very imperfectly hardened by earthy
deposits ; a bony stage, seen in most of the higher
animals. He shew^ed that in actual development of
the higher animals these historical grades are repeated,
the skull being at first a mere membranous or fibrous
investment of the developing nervous masses, then be-
coming cartilaginous, and, lastly, bony. He made some
important prophetic remarks as to the probable im-
portance that future embryological work would give to
the distinction between cartilage and membrane bones
— a prophecy that has been more than fully realised
by the investigations of Hertwig and of others. Our
present knowledge of the skull differs from Huxley's
conception practically only in a fuller knowledge of
details. We know now that throughout the series
there is a primitive set of structures common to all ani-
mals higher in the scale than Amphioxus, and forming
the base and lateral walls of the skull. This is termed
the Chondrocranium, because it is laid down in carti-
lage ; it is composed of the separate elements which

Classification of Birds 135

Huxley indicated, and, in different animals, as Huxley
suggested, the exact limits of the ossification of the
primitive cartilages differ in extent, but occur in ho-
mologous situations. This primitive skull is roofed
over by a series of membrane bones which have no
connection in origin with the other portions of the
skull, and which have no representative in the verte-
bral column, but which are the direct descendants of
the bony scales clothing the external skin in carti-
laginous fishes. In one respect only was Huxley
erroneous. Partly b}^ inadvertence, and partly because
the minute details of vertebrate embryology became
really familiar to zoologists only after the elaborate
work of Balfour of Cambridge, Huxley, in his account
of the formation of the first beginnings of the skeleton
in the embryo, made confusion between the walls of
the primitive groove, which, in reality, give rise to the
nervous structures, and those embryonic tissues which
form the skeletal S3^stem.

The next great piece of work which we may take as
typical of Huxley's contributions to vertebrate anat-
omy, is his classical study on the classification of birds.
The great group of birds contains a larger number of
species than is known in any other group of verte-
brates, and, in this vast assemblage of forms there is
strikingly little anatomical difference. The ostrich
and the humming-bird might perhaps be taken as
types of the extremest differences to be found, and yet,
although these differ in size, plumage, adaptations,
habits, mode of life, and almost everj^thing that can
separate living things, the two conform so closely to
the common type of bird-structure that knowledge of
the anatomy of one would be a sufBcient guide, down
to minute details, for dissection of the other. None

136 Thomas Henry Huxley

the less, there are huudreds of thousands of species of
Ijirds between these two types. It is not surprising
that to reduce this vast assemblage of similar creatures
to an ordered system of classification has proved one of
the most difficult tasks attempted by zoologists. Before
Huxley, it had been attempted by a number of distin-
guished zoologists ; but, for the most part, these had
relied too much on merely external characters and on
superficial modifications in obvious relation to habits.
When Huxley, in the course of a set of lectures on
Comparative Anatomy, was about to approach the sub-
ject of birds he was asked by a zoologist how he pro-
posed to treat them. " I intend," he repHed, " to
treat them as extinct animals." By that he meant
that it was his purpose to make a prolonged study of
their skeletal structures the basis of his grouping, fol-
lowing the lines which Cuvier, Owen, and he himself
had pursued so successfully in the case of the fossil
remains of vertebrates. The result was that this first
systematic study of even one set of the anatomical
characters of the group completely reformed the method
by which all subsequent workers have tried to grapple
with the problem ; ornithology was raised from a pro-
cess akin to stamp-collecting to a reasoned scientific
study. The immediate practical results were equally
important. He was able to shew that among the in-
numerable known forms there were three grades of
structure. The lowest had already been recognised and
named by Haeckel ; it consisted of the Saururse, or rep-
tile-like birds, and contained a single fossil form, Ar-
chaeopteryx, distinguished front all living birds by the
presence of a hand-like wing in which the metacarpal
bones were well developed and freely movable, and by
the possession of a long lizard-like tail actually exceed-

Classification of Birds 137

ing in length the remainder of the spinal column. The
next group of Ratites, although it contained only the
Ostrich, Rhea, Emu, Cassowar)-, and Apteryx, he
shewed to be equivalent in anatomical coherence to the
third great group of Carinates, which incUides the vast
majority of living birds. In his arrangement of the
latter group, he laid most stress on the characters of
the bony structures which form the palate, and by this
simple means was able to la}- down clearly at least the
main lines of a natural classification of the group.

Huxley's work upon birds, like his work in many
other branches of anatomy, has been so overlaid by the
investigations of subsequent zoologists that it is easy
to overlook its importance. His employment of the
skeleton as the basis of classification was succeeded by
the work of others who made a similar use of the mus-
cular anatomy, of the intestinal canal, of the windpipe,
of the tendons of the feet, and many other structures
which display anatomical modifications in different
birds. The modern student finds that all these new
sets of facts are much greater in bulk than the work of
Huxley, and it is easy for him to remain in ignorance
that they were all suggested and inspired by the method
which Huxley employed. He finds that further re-
search has supplanted some of Huxley's conclusions,
and it is easj' for him to remain in ignorance that the
conclusions themselves suggested the investigations
which have modified them. Huxley's anatomical work
was essentially living and stimulating, and too often it
has become lost to sight simpl}^ because of the vast
superstructures of new facts to which it gave rise.

Closely associated with vertebrate anatomy is the
subject of geographical distribution. In 1857 the study
of this important department of zoology was placed on

138 Thomas Henry Huxley

a scientific basis, practicall}^ for the first time, by a
memoir on the geographical distribution of birds pub-
lished in ihe /ounia/ of the Linnaean vSociety of London.
It was known in a general way that different kinds of
creatures were found in different parts of the world,
but little attempt had been made to map out the world
into regions characterised by their animal and vege-
table inhabitants, as the political divisions of the world
are characterised by their different governments and
policies. Mr. Sclater, who two years later became sec-
retary of the Zoological Society of London, in his
memoir introduced the subject in the following words :

" It is a -well-known and universally acknowledged fact that
we can choose two portions of the globe of which the respective
fauna and flora shall be so difierent that we should not be far
wrong in supposing them to have been the result of distinct
creations. Assuming, then, that there are, or may be, more
areas of creation than one, the question naturally arises how
many of them are there, and what are their respective extents
and boundaries ; or, in other words, what are the most natural
primary outological divisions of the earth's surface ? "

Mr. Sclater' s answer was that there are six great
regions; Neotropical, Nearctic, Palsearctic, Ethiopian,
Indian, and Australian, and his answer, with minor
alterations and the addition of a great wealth of de-
tail, has been accepted by zoology.

Two years later, however, Darwin gave a new mean-
ing and a new importance to Sclater' s work, by the
new interpretation he caused to be placed on the words
" centres of creation." Sclater's facts and areas re-
mained the same ; Darwin rejected the idea of separate
creations in the older sense of the words, and laid stress
on the impossibility of accounting for the resemblances
within a region and for the differences between regions

Geographical Distribution 139

by climatic differences and so forth. He raised the
questions of modes of dispersal and of barriers to dis-
persal, of similarities due to common descent, and of the
modifying results produced by isolation. He gave, in
fact, a theory of the " creations" which Mr. Sclater
had shewn to be a probable assumption. It was in the
nature of things that Huxley should make a contribu-
tion to a set of problems so novel and of so much
importance to zoology. In 1868, in the course of a
memoir on the anatomy of the gallinaceous birds and
their allies, he made a useful attempt, nearly the first
of its kind, to correlate anatomical facts with geo-
graphical distribution. Having shewn the diverging
lines of anatomical structure that existed in the group
of creatures he had been considering, he went on to
shew that there was a definite relation between the
varieties of structure and the different positions on the
surface of the globe occupied at the present time by
the creatures in question. He made, in fact, the geo-
graphical position a necessary part of the whole idea of
a species or of a group, and so introduced a conception
which has become a permanent part of zoological
science.

With regard to the number and limits of the zoologi-
cal regions into which the world may be divided, Hux-
ley raised a number of problems which have not yet
reached a full solution. Mr. Sclater had divided the
world into six great regions : the Nearctic, including
the continent of North America, with an overlap into
what is called South America by geographers ; the
Palaearctic, comprising Europe and the greater part of
Asia; the Oriental, containing certain southern portions
of Asia, such as India south of the Himalayas and many
of the adjacent islands; the Ethiopian, including Africa,

140 Thomas Henry Huxley

except north of the Sahara, and Madagascar ; the Aus-
tralian, containing Austraha and New Zealand and
some of the more southeastern of the islands of Mala}'- ;
the Neotropical, including South America. Huxle}^
first called attention to certain noteworth}^ resemblances
between the Neotropical and the Australian regions of
Sclater, and held that a primary division of the world
was into Ardogcea, comprising the great land masses
of the Northern Hemisphere with a part of their exten-
sion across the equator, and Notogaui, which contained
Australia but not New Zealand and South America.
Although this acute suggestion has not been generally
accepted as a modification of Mr. Sclater' s scheme, it
called attention in a striking fashion to some very re-
markable features in the distribution of animals. Sub-
sequent writers have considerably extended Huxle3''s
conception of the similarities to be found among the
more southern land areas. Thej- have pointed out that
the most striking idea of the distribution of land and
water on the surface of the globe is to be got by con-
sidering the globe alternately from one pole and from
the other. In the south, a clump of ice-bound land,
well within the Antarctic Circle, surrounds the pole.
All else is a wide domain of ocean broken only where
tapering and isolated tongues of land, South America,
the Cape, Australia, lean down from the great land
masses of the north. On the other hand, all the great
land masses expand in the Northern Hemisphere, and
shoulder one another round the North Pole. America
is separated from Asia only by the shallowest and nar-
rowest of straits ; an elevation of a few fathoms would
unite Greenland with Europe. Science points definitel}^
to some part of the great northern land area as the
centre of life for at least the larger terrestrial forms of

South America and Australia 141

life. We know that these arose successively, primitive
birds like the ostriches being older than higher forms
like the parrots and singing birds ; the pouched mar-
supials preceding the antelopes and the lion; the lemurs
coming befors the man-like apes. Each wave of life
spread over the whole area producing after its kind ;
then, pressing round the northern land area, it met a
thousand different conditions of environment, different
foods, enemies, and climates, and broke up into differ-
ent genera and species. But there was never a wave
of life that was not followed bv another wave. In the
struggle for existence between the newer and the older
forms, the older forms were gradually driven south-
wards towards the diverging fringes of the land masses.
The vanquished left behind them on the field of battle
only their bones, to become fossils. Sometimes suc-
ceeding waves swept along to the extreme limits of the
land, and many early types were utterly destroyed.
But others found sanctuary in the ends of the South,
and such survivors of older and earlier types of life
cause a similarity between the southern lands that
Huxley called Notogoea, although the extent of his
region must be increased.

Recently, however, there has been a recurrence to
Huxley's suggested union of South America and Aus-
tralia, based on new evidence of a direct kind, quite
different from that which had just been given. Various
groups of naturalists have stated that there are similar-
ities between the invertebrate inhabitants of Australia
and of South America of a kind which makes the exist-
ence of a direct land connection in the Southern Hemi-
sphere extremely probable. Moreover, Ameghino has
recently described some marsupial fossils from South
America which, he states, belong to the Australian

142 Thomas Henry Huxley

group of Dasyuridas, and Oldfield Thomas has described
a new mammal from South America which is unlike
the opossums of America and like the diprotodonts of
Australia. So that, while the general opinion has been
against Huxle3''s division, Notogoea, in the strict mean-
ing which he gave to it, there has recently been an
opinion growing in its favour.

Huxley also made minor alterations in Mr. Sclater's
scheme by forming an additional circumpolar region
for the Northern Hemisphere, and by elevating New
Zealand into a separate region, distinct from Australia.
On these points there is a balance of opinion against
his views.

Before leaving the subject of Huxley's contributions
to vertebrate anatomy, the actual details of which
would occupy far too much space, it is necessary to
mention the great importance to zoology of the new
terms and new ideas he introduced into classification.
His mind was, above all things, orderly and comprehen-
sive, and while, in innumerable minute points, from the
structure of the palate of birds to the structure of the
roots of human hair (actually the subject of Huxley's
first published contribution to scientific knowledge), he
added to the number of known facts, he did even more
important work in co-ordinating and grouping together
the known body of facts. To him are due not only the
names, but the idea, that the mammalian animals fall
into three grades of ascending complexitj' of organisa-
tion : the reptile-like Prototheria, which lay large eggs,
and which have many other reptilian characters ; the
Metatheria, or marsupial animals ; the Eutheria, or
higher animals, which include all the common animals
from the mole or rabbit up to man. In a similar
fashion, he grouped the vertebrates into three divisions,

Classification of Vertebrates

143

and named them : Ichthyopsida, which include the fish
and Amphibia, creatures in which the aquatic habit
dominates the life history and the anatomical structure ;
Sauropsida, including birds and reptiles, on the close
connection between which he threw so much light ;
Mammalia.

CHAPTER IX

MAN^ ANn THE APES

Objections to Zoological Discussion of Man's Place — Owen's
Prudence — Huxley's Determination to Speak out — Ac-
count of bis Treatment of Man's Place in Nature — Ad-
ditions Made bv More Recent Work.

EVEN before the publication of The Origin of Species
there was a considerable nervousness in the minds
of the more orthodox as to discussions on the position of
the human species in zoological classification. Men
of the broadest minds, such as Lyell, who himself had
suffered considerably from outside interference with the
scientific right to publish scientific conclusions, was
strongly opposed to anything that seemed to tend to-
wards breaking down the barrier between man and the
lower creatures. Sir William lyawrence, a very distin-
guished and able man, had been criticised with the
greatest severity, and had been nearly ostracised, for a
very mild little book On Man ; and Huxley tells us that
the electors to the Chair of a Scotch University had re-
fused to invite a distinguished man, to whom the post
would have been acceptable, because he had advocated
the view that there were several species of man. The
court political leaders, and society generally, resented

144

Owen on Man's Place 145

strongly anything that seemed at all likely to disturb
the somewhat narrow orthodoxy prevalent in those
times ; and, as there were comparatively few posts open
to scientific men, and comparatively greater chances of
posts being made for men of talent and ability who ad-
hered to the respectable traditions, those who tampered
with so serious a question as the place of man were
likely to burn their fingers severely. Howev^er, the
difficulties of discussing these problems were much
greater immediately after 1859. One of the most sur-
prising things in the history of this century is the sud-
den intensity of the opposition of the public, particularly
the respectable and religious public, to zoological writ-
ing upon man, immediately after the publication of the
On'gi)!. Before that time anatomists did not neces-
sarily hesitate to point out the close resemblance be-
tween the anatomy of man and that of the higher apes,
and the difficulties anatomists had in making anatomi-
cal distinction of value between them. Thus Professor
Owen, wdio, as a writer, was rather unusually nervous
about expressing facts to which any objection nn'ght be
raised by those outside the strictly scientific world, had
written the following paragraph in the course of an
essay on the characters of the class Mammalia, pub-
lished, in 1857, ill the Journal of the Proceedings of the
I An nee an Society :

" Not beiug able to appreciate or conceive of the distinction
between the psychical phenomena of a chimpanzee and of a
Boschisnian or of an Aztec, with arrested brain-growth, as be-
ing of a nature so essential as to preclude a comparison be-
tween them, or as being other than a difference of degree, I
cannot shut my eyes to the significance of that all-pervading
similitude of structure — every tooth, every bone, strictly
homologous — which makes the determination of the differ-
ence between Homo and Pithecus the anatomist's difficulty."

146 Thomas Henry Huxley

It is true, he went on to explain his belief in the exist-
ence of certain characters in the brain which seemed to
him to justify the separation of man in a different group
from that in which the apes were placed ; but it is
certain that he regretted having said anything which
seemed to support the Darwinian view ; and, two 3^ears
later, when the opposition to Darwin was in its acutest
stage, Owen withdrew his words. His " Reade Lec-
ture," delivered in the University of Cambridge, was
in all respects a reprint of the essay from which we
have just quoted, but the apparently dangerous words
were omitted. More than that, the points insisted on
in the essay as being sufficient for the purpose of sepa-
rating man in zoological classification were elevated
into a reason against descent. Although Huxley, in
several addresses and publications, disproved the exist-
ence of the alleged differences, and although Sir Wil-
liam Flower gave an actual demonstration shewing the
essential identity of the brain of man and of the apes in
the matter in question, Owen never admitted his error.
It is not surprising that, if an anatomist so distin-
guished and acute as was Owen allowed his judgment
to be completely overborne by the storm of prejudice
against Darwinism, those who were not anatomists
should have held up to ridicule all idea of comparison
between man and the apes. In The Origin of Species
itself, no elaborate attempt had been made to set forth
the anatomical arguments in favour of or against a
community of descent for man and the apes. But it
was made sufficiently plain, and the public laid hold of
the point eagerly, that the doctrine of descent was not
meant to exclude man from the field of its operation.
Huxley, in the course of his ordinar}' work as Professor
of Biology, had, among many other subjects, naturally

CHARLES DARWIN

From the painting by Hon. John Collier in the N

ational Portrait Gallery

Lectures to Workingmen 147

turned his attention to the anatomy and classification
of the higher animals. When Owen's essay appeared,
he found that he was unable to agree with many of the
conclusions contained in it, and had set about a renewed
investigation of the matter. Thus it happened that,
when the question became prominent, in i860, Huxley
was ready with material contributions to it. He be-
lieved, moreover, that, as Darwin was not specially
acquainted with the anatomy and development of verte-
brates, there was an opportunity for doing a real service
to the cause of evolution. Accordingly, in i860, he
took for the subject of a series of lectures to working-
men the " Relation of Man to the L,ower Animals,"
and, in 1862, expanded the lectures into a volume
called Man' s Place in Nature. When it was ready, he
was prepared to say with a good conscience that his
conclusions " had not been formed hastily or enunciated
crudely."

" I thought," he wrote in the preface to the 1894 edition, " I
had earned the right to publish them, and even fancied I might
be thanked, rather than reproved, for so doing. However, in
my anxiety to promulgate nothing erroneous, I asked a highly
competent anatomist and very good friend of mine to look
through my proofs, and, if he could, point out any errors of
fact. I was well pleased when he returned them without any
criticism on that score ; but my satisfaction was speedily dashed
by the very earnest warning, as to the consequences of publica-
tion, which my friend's interest in my welfare led him to give ;
but, as I have confessed elsewhere, when I was a young man
there was just a little — a mere soiipgon — in my composition
of that tenacity of purpose which has another name, and I felt
sure that all the evil things prophesied would not be so painful
to me as the giving up of that which I had resolved to do, upon
grounds which I conceived to be right. So the book came out,
and I must do my friend the justice to say that his forecast was
completely justified. The Boreas of criticism blew his hardest

148 Thomas Henry Huxley

blasts of niisrepreseutation and ridicule for soiiie years ; and I
was even as one of the wicked. Indeed, it surprises me, ;it
times, to think how anyone who had sunk so low could have
emerged into, at any rate, relative respectability."

Further, in the same preface, Huxley strongly ad-
vises others to imitate his action in this matter. There
are now, and no doubt there always will be, truths
" plainly obvious and generall)' denied." Whoever
attacks the current ideas is certain, unless human
nature changes greatl3% to encounter a bitter opposition,
and there will always be those among his friends who
recommend him to temper truth by prtidence. Hux-
ley's advice is different :

"If there is a young man of the present generation who has
taken as much trouble as I did to assure himself that they are
truths, let him come out with them, without troubling his head
about the barking of the dogs of St. Ernulphus. Veritas pnr-
valebit — some day ; and, even if she does not prevail in his
time, he himself will be all the better and wiser for having
tried to help her. And let him recollect that such great reward
is full payment for all his labour and pains."

Although they were written so long ago, the lectures
on " Man's Place in Nature " are still the best existing
treatise on the subject, and we shall give an outline of
them, mentioning the chief points in which further work
has been done. Information concerning the man-like
apes was scattered in very different places, in the
grave records of scientific societies, in the letters of
travellers and missionaries, in the reports of the zoo-
logical societies which had been in possession of living
specimens. The facts had to be sifted out from a great
mass of verbiage and unfounded statement. With a
characteristic desire for historical accuracy, more usual
in a man of letters than in an anatomist, Huxlej' began

Early Rumours of Anthropoids 149

with a study of classical and mediaeval legends of the
existence of pigmies and man-like creatures; but, while
recognising that legends of satyrs and fauns were pre-
sages of the discovery of man-like apes, he was unable
to find any actual record earlier than that contained in
Pigafetta's Description of the Kingdom of Congo, drawn
up from the notes of a Portuguese sailor and published
in 1598. The descriptions and figures in this work ap-
parently referred to chimpanzees. From this date on-
wards he traces the literature of the animals in question,
and then proceeds to give an account of them.

There are four distinct kinds of man-like apes : in
Eastern Asia the Orangs and the Gibbous (although
some later writers differ from Huxley in removing the
Gibbons from the group of anthropoids) ; in Western
Africa, the Chimpanzees and the Gorillas. All these
have certain characters in common. They are inhabit-
ants of the old world; they all have the same number
of teeth as man, possessing four incisors, two canines,
four premolars, and six true molars in each jaw, in the
adult condition, while the milk dentition, as in man,
consists of twenty teeth, — four incisors, two canines, and
four molars in each jaw. vSince Huxley wrote, a large
bulk of additional work upon teeth has been published,
and we now know that man and the anthropoid apes
display the same kind of degenerative specialisation in
their jaws. Simpler and older forms of mammals
had a much larger number of teeth, and these differed
among themselves more than the teeth of the higher
forms. In the Anthropoids and Man, the jaws are pro-
portionately shorter and less heavy than in simpler
forms, and, in correspondence with this, the number of
the teeth has become reduced, while the teeth them-
selves tend to form a more even row. The canine or

150 Thomas Henry Huxley

eye-teeth are relatively smaller in the gorilla than in
primitive mammals ; the}' are still smaller in the lower
races of man ; while in ordinary civilised man they do
not project above the others. The shortening of the
jaw is still proceeding, and, although in lower races of
man the last molar or wisdom tooth is almost as large
as the molars in front of it, in the higher races the wis-
dom tooth is much smaller and frequently does not de-
velop at all, or begins to decay ver}' soon after its
appearance. If the process of extinction of lower races
were to proceed much further, so that civilised white
races became the only human inhabitants of the earth,
then the gap between the Anthropoids and Man would
be wider than it now is; man would be characterised by
the presence of one tooth less than the anthropoids, just
as the anthropoids and some lower monke5'S are char-
acterised by having one tooth less than monkeys still
lower.

In all, the nostrils have a narrow partition and look
downwards as in man. The arms are alwa3-s longer
than the legs, the difference being greatest in the orang
and least in the chimpanzee. We know^ now that in
the lower races of man, the arms are proportionately
longer than in higher races, and it has recently been
shewn that, although there is a general proportion be-
tween the length of the long bones and the height of
the whole body in man, so that the height may be cal-
culated with an average error from these bones, yet the
probable error is greater when the calculation is made
from the arms than when it is made from the legs. In
fact, the length of arm as compared to the length of leg
and to whole height is a more variable feature in man
than the length of leg.

In all the anthropoids, the forelimbs end in hands

Toes and Thumbs 151

with longer or shorter thumbs, and the great toe, always
smaller than in man, is far more movable and can be
opposed like a thumb to the other toes. vSince Huxley
wrote, a considerable amount of evidence has been col-
lected shewing that partial opposability of the toe in
man is not uncommon, and that there is evidence as to
a tendency to increase of length of the great toe within
historical times. None of the great apes have tails,
and none of them have the cheek pouches common
among lower monkeys.

Huxley then gives an account of the natural history
of these animals, an account which still remains the
best in literature. He sums up the habits of the Asiatic
forms as follows :

1. They may readily move along the ground in the
erect, or semi-erect position, and without direct support
from the arms.

2. They may possess an extremely loud voice, so loud
as to be readily heard one or two miles.

3. They may be capable of great viciousness and vio-
lence when irritated ; and this is especially true of adult
males.

4. They may build a nest to sleep in.

He finds the same general characters in the case of
the gorilla and chimpanzee, but in their case there was
not quite so reliable evidence upon which to go.

Although, since Huxley wrote, there has been much
greater opportunity of studying anthropoid apes, both
in confinement and in their native haunts, there is not
much to add to his account. Some little time ago, the
world was interested by the assertion of a clever Ameri-
can that he had discovered a kind of language used by
the higher apes, and that he was able to communi-
cate with them. Mr. Gamier, the person in question,

152 Thomas Henry Huxley

declared his intention of going out to tropical Africa and
establishing himself in a strong cage in the forests in-
habited by gorillas and chimpanzees, in the hope that,
impelled by curiosity, they would look upon him as we
look on monkeys in a zoological garden, and that he
would thus be able to make his knowledge and records
of monkey language more perfect. As a matter of fact
he went to Africa, and on his return published a vol-
ume which aroused the indignation of naturalists.
There was internal evidence that he had gone no
further than the garden of a coast station, and his pre-
tended account of the habits of monkeys as they lived
in their native haunts contained nothing that was not
already known. There is no doubt but that the anthro-
poid apes, like many other animals, use modulations of
their voice to express emotional states ; that, in fact,
they have love-cries and cries of warning, of alarm, and
of pleasure ; but there is not the smallest evidence to
suppose that in the case of the anthropoids these cries
approach more nearly to speech than the cries of any
other of the higher mammals.

Since Huxley's volume was published, a large amount
of information has been published by Darwin, Romanes,
and others upon the mental capacities of anthropoids
kept in confinement, and the result of this has been to
prove that the anthropoids, in especial the chimpanzees,
possess mental powers more akin to those of man than
are to be found in the most intelligent of the quadru-
peds. We may cite some instances of these higher
powers. Vosmaern had a tame female orang-outang
that was able to untie the most intricate knot with
fingers or teeth, and took such pleasure in doing it that
she regularly untied the shoes of those who came near
her. The female chimpanzee called Sally, that lived

Apes in Captivity 153

for many years in the Zoological Society's Gardens in
London, was taught by its keeper and by Romanes an
interesting variety of "tricks" involving at least the
rudiments of what may be called human intelligence.
Among other feats, it would pick up from the floor and
present to the keeper or to a visitor, a stated number of
straws up to five. Many monkeys seem nearly purely
destructive in their dealings with objects within their
reach ; but lycutemann tells of an orang-outang which
" tried to put to its proper use whatever was given to
him. To my great surprise he attempted to put on a
pair of gloves. He supported himself on a light walk-
ing cane and, when it bent under him, made ridiculous
motions to right it again." Brehm tells of a chim-
panzee :

"After eating, he at once begins to clean up. He holds a
stick of wood in front of him, or puts his hands in his master's
slippers, and slides about the room, then takes a cloth and
scrubs the floor. Scouring, sweeping, and dusting are his
favourite occupations ; and, when he once gets hold of the
cloth, he never wants to give it up."

Falkenstein has given a detailed description of a gorilla
which was remarkable for his delicacy in eating.

" He would take a cup or glass with the greatest care, using
both hands to carry it to his mouth, and setting it down so
carefully that I do not remember having lost a single piece of
crockery through him, though we had never tried to teach him
the use of such vessels, wishing to bring him to Europe as
nearly in his natural condition as possible."

These and a multitude of similar observations which
have been made since Huxley wrote are t3^pical of the
increase of our knowledge on the habits and capacities
of the anthropoid apes. They all serve to show that in

154 Thomas Henry Huxley

them the instinct for experimental investigation of
everything with wliich they are surrounded, and their
imitative faculties are pecuharly great. The import-
ance of this, from the point of view of Huxley's argu-
ment, is great. The difference between the instincts of
the lower animals and the intelligence of man is that
instincts are to a large extent fixed and mechanical.
The proper performance of an instinct demands the
presence of exactly the right external conditions for its
accomplishment. In the absence of these conditions,
the call to perform the instinctive action is equally great,
and results in useless performances. In many of the
higher animals these elaborate instincts are more gen-
eral in their character, and are supplemented bj^ a con-
siderable but varj'ing aptitude for modification of
instinctive action to suit varieties of surrounding cir-
cumstances. As this intelligence becomes more and
more developed, the blind, mechanical instinct becomes
weaker. A large number of instances might be given
of such instincts modified by dawning intelligence. The
chief factors in producing the change are, as has been
shewn by Professor Groos, the possession of a general
instinct to imitate and to experiment, and the existence
of a peiiod of 3-outh in which the 3'oung creature may
practise these instincts, and so prepare itself for the
more serious purposes of adult life. The anthropoid
apes seem to possess these experimental instincts to an
extent much greater than that observed in any other
class of animals, and, as they have a long period of
youth, they have the opportunity of putting them into
practice to the fullest possible extent.

From the natural history of the anthropoid apes,
Huxley passed to consideration of their relation to man,
prefacing his observations with a passage defending the

Instinct and Intelligence 155

utility of the enquiry, a passage necessary enough in
these days of prej udice, but now chiefly with historical
interest :

" It will be admitted that some knowledge of mau's position
in the animate world is an indispensable preliminary to the
proper understanding of his relations to the universe ; and this
again resolves itself in the long run into an enquiry into the
nature and the closeness of the ties which connect him with
those singular creatures whose history has been sketched iu the
preceding pages.

" The importance of such an enquirj^ is, indeed, intuitively
manifest. Brought face to face with these blurred copies of
himself, the least thoughtful of men is conscious of a certain
shock ; due perhaps not so much to disgust at the aspect of
what looks like an insulting caricature, as to the awakening of
a sudden and profound mistrvist of time-honoured theories and
strongly rooted prejudices regarding his own position in nature,
and his relations to the underworld of life ; while that which
remains a dim suspicion for the unthinking, becomes a vast
argument, fraught with the deepest consequences, for all who
are acquainted with the recent progress of the anatomical and
physiological sciences."

Htixley then proceeded to elaborate the argtiment
from development for the essential identity of man and
the apes. This argument has now become more or
less familiar to us all, as it has gained additional sup-
port from recent extension of embr}'ological knowledge,
and as it has been used in ever}- work on evoltition
since Huxley first laid stress on it. The adult forms
of animals are much more complex than their embry-
onic stages, and the series of changes passed through in
attaining the adult condition make up the embryologi-
cal history of the animal. Huxley took the embryology
of the dog as an example of the process in the higher
animals generallj', and as it had been worked out in

156 Thomas Henry Huxley

detail by a set of investigators. The dog, like all verte-
brate animals, begins its existence as an egg ; and this
body is just as much an egg as that of a fowl, although,
in the case of the dog, there is not the accumulation of
nutritive material which bloats the egg of the hen into
its enormous size. Since Huxley wrote, it has been
shewn clearly that among the mammalian animals there
has been a gradual reduction in the size of the egg.
The ancestors of the manmials laid large eggs, like
those of birds or reptiles ; and there still exist two
strange mammalian creatures, the Ornithorhynchus
and Echidna of Australia, which lay large, reptilian-like
eggs. The ancestors of most living mammalia acquired
the habit of retaining the eggs within the body until
they were hatched ; and, as a result of this, certain
structures which grow out from the embryo while it is
still within the egg and become applied to the inner
wall of the porous shell for the purpose of obtaining air,
got their supply of oxygen, not from the outer air, but
from the blood-vessels of the maternal tissues. "When
this connection (called the placenta) between embryo
and mother through the egg-shell became more perfect,
not onl\- oxygen but food-material was obtained from
the blood-vessels of the mother; and, in consequence, it
became unnecessary for the eggs to be provided with a
large suppl}' of food-yolk. Among existing marsupial
animals, which, on the whole, represent a lower type of
mammalian structure than ordinary mammals, there is
more food-yolk than in ordinary mammals, and less food-
3-olk than in the two egg-laying mammals. In the
ordinary mammals, such as the rabbit, dog, monke}',
and man, there is practically no j^olk whatever deposited
in the egg ; the egg is of minute size, and the embryo
obtains most of its food from the maternal blood.

Mammalian Eggs 157

The small egg of the mammal divides into a number
of cells, which form a hollow sphere ; on the upper sur-
face of this the development of organs begins with the
formation of a depression which indicates the future
middle line of the animal, and is, in fact, the beginning
of the nervous system. Under this is formed a straight
rod of gelatinous material, the foundation of the verte-
bral column, and the body of the embryo is gradually
pinched off from the surface of the hollow sphere.
After tracing the details of this process, Huxley pro-
ceeded as follows :

"The history of the development of auy other vertebrate
animal, lizard, snake, frog or fish, tells the same story. There
is always, to begin with, an eg^, having the same essential
structure as that of the dog ; the yelk of that egg always
undergoes division, or segmentation, as it is often called ; the
ultimate products of that segmentation constitute the building
materials for the body of the young animal; and this is built
up round a primitive groove, in the floor of which a notochord
is developed. Furthermore, there is a period in which the
young of all these animals resemble one another, not merely in
outward form, but in all essentials of structure, so closely, that
the differences between them are inconsiderable, while in their
subsequent course they diverge more and more widely from
one another. And it is a general law, that, the more closely
any animals resemble one another in adult structure, the lon-
ger and the more intimately do their embryos resemble one
another ; so that, for example, the embryos of a snake and of a
lizard remain like one another longer than do those of a snake
and of a bird ; and the embryos of a dog and of a cat remain like
one another for a far longer period than do those of a dog and
a bird ; or of a dog and an opossum ; or even than those of a
dog and a monkey."

This general rule, that the longer the paths of em-
bryonic development of two animals keep identical the

158 Thomas Henry Huxley

more iiearl}- the two animals are related, when Huxley
wrote, was founded on a much smaller number of facts
than now are known. Since i860 an enormous bulk of
embryological investigation has been published, and
the total result has been to confirm Huxley's position
in the fullest possible way. A certain number of ex-
ceptions have been found, but these exceptions are so
obviously special adaptations to special circumstances
that their existence only makes the general truth of the
proposition more clear. The most common kind of ex-
ception occurs when two closely related animals live
under very different conditions. For instance, many
marine animals have close allies that in comparatively
recent times have taken to live in fresh water. The
conditions of life in fresh water are very different, espe-
ciall}^ for delicate creatures susceptible to rapid changes
of temperature, or unable to withstand strong currents.
Thus most of the allies of the fresh- water crayfish, which
live in the sea, lay eggs from which there are soon
hatched minute, almost transparent larvae, exceedingly
unlike the adult. In the comparative!}^ equable tem-
perature of sea-water, and in the usual absence of strong
currents, these small larvae, as Huxley shewed later in
his volume on the Crayfish^ live a free life, obtaining
their own food, and by a series of slow transformations
gradually acquire the adult form. In fresh water, how-
ever, the delicate larvae would be unable to live, and
the mode of development is different. The series of
slow transformations is condensed, and takes place
almost entirely inside the egg-shell ; so that, when
hatching occurs, the young crayfish is exceedingly like
the adult. Apart from such special cases, it is true
that the study of development affords a clear test of
closeness of structural affinity.

Impartial View of Man 159

Huxley then proceeds to discuss the development of
man.

"Is he something apart? Does he originate in a totally
different way from dog, bird, frog, and fish, thus justifying
those who assert him to have no place in nature, and no real
affinity with the lower world of animal life ? Or does he originate
in a similar germ, pass through the same slow and gradually
progressive modifications, depend on the same contrivances
for protection and nutrition, and finally enter the world by the
help of the same mechanism ? The reply is not doubtful for a
moment, and has not been doubtful any time these thirty
years. Without question, the mode of origin, and the early
stages of the development of man are identical with those of
animals immediately below him in the scale ; without doubt,
in these respects, he is far nearer the apes than the apes are to
the dog."

Then, on lines with which, by continuous repetition and
expansion by authors subsequent to him, we have now
become familiar, Htixley compared, stage bj' stage, the
development of man with that of other animals, and
shewed, first, its essential similarity, and then that in
every case where it departed from the development of
the dog it resembled more closely the development of
the ape. He went on to review the anatomy of man :

"Thus, identical in the physical processes by which he
originates, — identical, in the early stages of his formation —
identical in the mode of his nutrition before and after birth,
with the animals which lie immediately below him in the scale,
— Man, if his adult and perfect structure be compared with
theirs exhibits, as might be expected, a marvellous likeness of
organisation. He resembles them as they resemble one
another — he differs from them as they differ from one another.
And, though these differences cannot be weighed and meas-
ured, their value may be readily estimated ; the scale or
standard of judgment, touching that value, being afforded and

i6o Thomas Henry Huxley

expressed by the system of classification of animals now cur-
rent among zoologists."

Having explained the general s^'stem of zoological
classification, he tried to dispel preliminary prejudice
by inducing his readers or hearers to take an outside
view of themselves.

" Let us endeavour for a moment to disconnect our thinking
selves from the mask of humanit}' ; let us imagine ourselves
scientific Saturnians, if you will, fairly acquainted with such
animals as now inhabit the earth, and employed in discussing
the relations they bear to a new and singular ' erect and feather-
less biped,' which some enterprising traveller, overcoming the
difficulties of space and gravitation, has brought from that dis-
tant planet for our inspection, well preserved, may be, in a
cask of rum. We should all, at once, agree upon placing him
among the mammalian vertebrates ; and his lower jaw, his
molars, and his brain, would leave no room for doubting the
systematic position of the new genus among those mammals
whose young are nourished during gestation by means of a
placenta, or what are called the placental mammals.

" Further, the most superficial study would at once convince
us that, among the orders of placental mammals, neither the
whales, nor the hoofed creatures, nor the sloths and ant-eaters,
nor the carnivorous cats, dogs, and bears, still less the rodent
rats and rabbits, or the insectivorous moles and hedgehogs, or
the bats, could claim our Homo as one of themselves.

"There would remain, then, but one order for comparison,
that of the apes (using that word in its broadest sense), and the
question for discussion would narrow itself to this — Is Man so
different from any of these apes that he must form an order by
himself? Or does he differ less from them than they differ
from one another, — and hence must take his place in the same
order with them ?

"Being happily free from all real or imaginar}' personal in-
terest in the results of the enquiry thus set afoot, we should
proceed to weigh the arguments on one side and on the other,
with as much jurlicial calmness as if the question related to a

Structure of Man and Apes 161

new opossum. We should endeavour to ascertain, without seek-
ing either to magnify or diminish them, all the characters by
which our new mammal differed from the apes ; and if we
found that these were of less structural value than those which
distinguish certain members of the ape order from others uni-
versally admitted to be of the same order, we should un-
doubtedly place the newly discovered tellurian genus with
them."

Ill pursuit of this method, aud taking the gorilla as
the type for immediate comparison with man, he passed
in review the various anatomical structures, shewing
that in every case man did not differ more from the
gorilla than that differed from other anthropoids. We
shall take a few examples of his method and results, re-
minding our readers, however, that Huxley carried his
comparisons into every important part of the anatomical
structure.

There is no part of the skeleton so characteristic-
ally human as the bones which form the pelvis, or
bony girdle of the hips. The expanded haunch-bones
form a basin-like structure which affords support to
the soft internal viscera during the habitually upright
position, and gives .space for the attachment of the
very large muscles which help man to a.ssume and sup-
port that attitude. In the gorilla this region differs
considerably from that in man. The haunch-bones are
narrower and much shallower, so that they do not form
so convenient a supporting basin; they have much less
surface for the attachment of muscles. The gibbon,
however, differs more vastly from the gorilla than that
differs from man. The haunch-bones are flat and nar-
row, and totally devoid of any basin-like formation ; the
passage through the pelvis is long and narrow, and the
ischia have outwardly curved prominences, which, in

]62 Thomas Henry Huxley

life, are coated by callosities on which the animal
habituall}- rests, and which are coarse, corn-like patches
of skin wlioll}' absent in the gorilla, in the chimpanzee,
in the orang, and in man.

In the characters of the hands, the feet, and the brain,
certain real or supposed structural distinctions between
man and the apes had been relied upon.

" Man has been defined as the only animal possessed of two
hands terminating his fore-limbs, and of two feet terminating
his hind-limbs, while it has been said that all the apes possess
four hands; and he has been affirmed to differ fundamentally
from all the apes in the characters of his brain, which alone, it
has been strangely asserted and reasserted, exhibits the struct-
ures known to anatomists as the posterior lobe, the posterior
cornu of the lateral ventricle, and the hippocampus minor.

"That the former proposition should have gained general
acceptance is not surprising — indeed, at first sight, appear-
ances are much in its favour ; but, as for the second, one can
only admire the surpassing courage of its enunciator, seeing
that it is an innovation which is not only opposed to generally
and justly accepted doctrines, but which is directly negatived
by the testimony of all original enquirers who have specially
investigated the matter ; and that it has neither been, nor can
be, supported by a single anatomical preparation. It would,
in fact, be unworthy of serious refutation except for the general
and natural belief that deliberate and reiterated assertions must
have some foundation."

The last remarks referred, of course, to the statements
of Owen, w^hich had made a great impression at the
time and the result of which still lingers in some of the
worse-informed treatises attacking evolution. Huxley
gave a lucid account of the general structure and
arrangement of the brain in the vertebrate series, ex-
plaining the well-known fact that from fish up to man
the general ground-plan of the brain is identical, but
that there is a progressive increase in the complexity

Brain of Man 163

and in the size of some parts compared with others.
Next, he showed that, so far from its being possible to
erect anj^ barrier in the structure of the brain between
man and the apes, there exists among the mammals an
almost complete series of gradations from brains a little
higher than that of the rabbit to brains a little lower
than that of man. He laid great stress on

"the remarkable circumstance that though, so far as our
present knowledge extends, there is one structural break in the
series of forms of simian brains, this hiatus does not lie between
man and the man-like apes, but between the lower and the
lowest simians ; or, in other words, between the old- and new-
world apes and monkeys, and the lemurs. Every lemur which
has yet been examined, in fact, has its cerebellum partially
visible from above, and its posterior lobe, with the contained
posterior cornu and hippocampus minor, more or less rudi-
mentary. Every marmoset, American monkey, old-world
monkey, baboon, or man-like ape, on the contrary, has its
cerebellum entirely hidden, posteriorly, by the cerebral lobes,
and possesses a large posterior cornu, with a well-developed
hippocampus minor." . . . " So far from the posterior lobe,
the posterior cornu, and the hippocampus minor being struct-
ures peculiar to, and characteristic of man, as they have over
and over again been asserted to be, even after the publication
of the clearest demonstration of the reverse, it is precisely these
structures which are the most marked cerebral characters com-
mon to man with the apes. They are among the most distinctly
simiaupeculiarities which the human organism exhibits," . . .
"Man differs from the chimpanzee or the orang, so far as
cerebral structure goes, less than these do from the monkeys,
and the difference between the brains of the chimpanzee and
of man is almost insignificant, when compared with that be-
tween the chimpanzee brain and that of a lemur."

Although Huxley found no structural differences be-
tween the brains of man and of anthropoid apes, he was
careful to lay great stress on the important difference

164 Tlioinas I Icnr)- Iluxlcy

in size and weight. A fnll-grown gorilla is nearly
twice as heavy as a luiropean woman, and yet the
heaviest known gorilla brain probal:)ly does not exceed
twenty ounces in weight, while healthy adult human
brains probably never weigh less than thirty-one or
thirty-two ounces. This difference is not of systematic
importance ; for cranial capacities shew that relatively
and absolutely there is a greater difference in brain-
weight between the lowest and highest human beings
than there is between the highest ape and the lowest
human being.

In dealing with the suggestion that man differs from
the apes in being bimanous, while the apes are quadru-
manous, Huxley first explained and discussed what the
exact differences between hands and feet are. He
shewed that in man the foot is absolutely distinguished
from the hand b}^ three structural points, although the
two organs are similar in general ground-plan. These
structural points are :

1. The arrangement of the tarsal bones.

2. The possession of a short flexor and short extensor
muscle of the digits.

3. The possession of a muscle named peronceus
lonous.

Then he described the foot of the gorilla, and shewed
that although it was superficially hand-like, it possessed
all the structural characters that distinguish a foot from
a hand. Tracing the structure of the foot downwards
through the .series of anthropoids and monkeys, he
established clearly that, while important differences
existed in nearly every single creature, the differences
between the gorilla and man were not greater than
those between the gorilla and other anthropoids, and
less than between the gorilla and lower monkeys.

Variation and Anatomy 165

This wonderful series of lectures ranks very high
among the important works of Huxley. It is true that
a considerable proportion of the work was not abso-
lutely original, but it had all been special!}' verified by
him. It was a task undertaken with the greatest cour-
age, and with a care equal to the courage ; and it settled
conclusively for all time the impossibility of making
between man and the anthropoids any anatomical bar-
riers greater than those which exist between the differ-
ent although closely related members of any of the other
family groups in the animal kingdom. The advance of
knowledge has only added to the details of Huxley's
argument ; it has not made any reconstruction of it
necessary. A writer on the same subject to-day would
to all certainty make use of the same general methods.
The chief differences, perhaps, that would be made are
two : First, greater stress would be laid on the distinc-
tion, first made by Huxlej' himself, between intermedi-
ate and linear types. (See p. 87). To use the popular
phrase, a great deal of water has passed under the
bridges since the separation of man from the ape-like
progenitors common to him and to the existing anthro-
poids. It has already been pointed out that the gradual
extinction of lower races of man is widening the appar-
ent gap between existing man and existing apes ; and
evidence accumulates that many still more primitive and
more ape-like races of man than the lowest existing
savages have disappeared from the surface of the earth.
Moreover, we know that existing anthropoids are the
degenerate and scattered remnants of what was once a
much more widely spread and more important group.
We have some reason for believing the contrary, and
no reason for believing that the surviving anthropoids
represent the most man -like apes that have lived.

1 66 Thomas Henry Huxley

The second great point in which a modern writer
would amend Huxley's statement of the case is more
purely anatomical. One result of Darwin's work has
been that anatomists attend much more closel}^ to the
slight variations of anatomical structure to be found
among individuals of the same species. A comparison
between an individual human bod}'^ and the body of an
individual gorilla is not now considered sufficient. The
comparison must be made between the results of dissec-
tion of a ver}' large number of men and of a very large
number of gorillas. The anatomy of a type is not the
anatomy of an individual ; it is a kind of central point
around which there oscillate the variations presented b)'
the individuals belonging to the type. So far as this
newer method has been applied, it has been found that
the variations of the gorilla type frequenth^, in the case
of individual organs, overlap the variations of the hu-
man tj'pe, and that the structure of man differs from
the structure of any anthropoid type only in that the
abstract central point of its variations is slightly differ-
ent from the abstract central point of the variations
presented by individual orangs, gorillas, and chim-
panzees.

CHAPTER X
I

SCIENCE AS A BRANCH OP EDUCATION

Science-Teaching Fifty Years Ago — Huxley's Insistence on
Reform — Science Primers — Physiography — Elementary
Physiology — The Crayfish — Manuals of Anatomy — Mod-
ern Microscopical Methods — -Practical Work in Biological
Teaching — Invention of the Type System — Science in
Medical Education — Science and Culture.

LESS than half a century ago, there was practically
no generally diffused knowledge of even the
elements of science and practically no provision for
teaching it. Medical students, in the course of their
professional education, received some small instruction
in botany, chemistry, and physiology ; in the greater
universities of England and the Continent there were
not in all a dozen professorships of science apart from
special branches of medicine ; in the Scottish univers-
ities there were one or two dreamy chairs of ' ' Natural
and Civil History," the occupiers of which were sup-
posed to dispense instruction in half a dozen sciences.
There was no scientific teaching at the public schools ;
there were practicall}' no books available for begin-
ners in science, and even the idea of guides to labora-
tory work had not been invented. Huxley, addressing
in 1854 a particularly select audience in St. Martin's
Hall, London, spoke to them of the

167

1 68 Thomas Henry Huxley

" utter ignorance as to the simplest laws of their own animal
life, which prevails among even the most highly educated
persons in this country." "I am addressing," he said, "I
imagine, an audience of cultivated persons ; and yet I dare
venture to assert that, with the exception of those of my
hearers who may chance to have received a medical educa-
tion, there is not one who could tell me what is the meaning
and use of an act which he performs a score of times ever}'
minute, and whose suspension would involve his immediate
death: — I mean the act of breathing — or who could state
in precise terms why it is that a confined atmosphere is
injurious to health."

The power to express the precise meaning of even
a common physiological act is probably not j'et pos-
sessed by all educated people ; but no one can doubt
that there is now a very generalh- diffused knowledge
of and interest in the ordinary processes of living
bodies. It is almost impossible for any of us to escape
some amount of scientific education at school, at col-
lege, from lectures, or from books. Certainly those
of us who have a natural inclination towards know-
ledge of that kind can hardly fail to have the oppor-
tunity of acquiring it. Ever}^ library abounds in
elementary and advanced scientific books ; every
iniiversity and many schools have their lectures and
laboratories for science, and there is scientific teaching
involved in every educational curriculum. To attempt
a complete account of how this radical change in the
attitude of the world to science has come about would
be to attempt to write the history of European civilis-
ation in the last half-century. A thousand causes have
been contributor}' ; but among these causes two have
been of extraordinary importance — an idea and a man.
The idea is the conception of organic evolution, and
the man was Huxley. The idea of evolution clothed

Speeches on Scientific Education 169

the dead bones of anatomy with a fair and hving
flesh, and the new body left the dusty corners of
museums to pervade the world, arousing the attention
and interest of all. A large part of the prodigious
mental activities of Huxle}^ was devoted to compel-
ling the world to take an interest in biological science.
Had his life-work been no more than this side of it,
it would have been of commanding importance. A
mere enumeration of the modes in which he assisted
in arousing attention to science among all classes
would fill many pages. Almost before he was settled
in London, in the lecture from which we quoted at the
beginning of this chapter he urged the " educational
value of the natural history sciences." In 1869 in a
speech in Liverpool ; in 1870 at University College,
London; in 1874 ^^ ^^is Rectorial address in the Uni-
versity of Aberdeen ; in 1876 at the opening ceremonial
of the Johns Hopkins University at Baltimore ; in the
same year at South Kensington ; in 1877 in a separate
essay ; in 1881 in an address to the International
Medical Congress : at these different times and address-
ing different and important audiences he continued to
urge the absolute necessity of a knowledge of nature.
A well-known and eloquent passage from an address
on "a liberal education " delivered to working men in
1868 contains the gist of his reiterated argument :

"Suppose it were perfectly certain that the life and fortune
of every oue of us would, one day or other, depend on his
winning or losing a game of chess, don't you think that we
should all consider it to be a primary duty to learn at least
the names and the moves of the pieces ; to have a notion
of a gambit, and a keen eye for all the means of giving and
getting out of check ? Do you not think that we should look
with a disapprobation amounting to scorn upon the father who

170 Thomas Mcnry Huxley

allowed his son, or the state which allowed its members, to
grow up without kuowiug a pawn from a knight ?

Yet it is a very plain and elementary truth, that the life,
the fortune, and the happiness of every one of us, and more
or less of those who are connected with us, do depend upon
our knowing something of the rules of a game infinitely more
difficult and complicated than chess. It is a game which has
been played for untold ages, every man and woman of us
being one of the two players in a game of his or her own.
The chess-board is the world, the pieces are the phenomena
of the universe, the rules of the game are what we call the
laws of nature. The player on the other side is hidden from
us. We know that his play is always fair, just, and patient.
But also we know, to our cost, that he never overlooks a
mistake, or makes the smallest allowance for ignorance.
To the man who plays well, the highest stakes are paid, with
that sort of overflowing generosity with which the strong shows
delight in strength, and one who plays ill is checkmated —
without haste, but without remorse."

Huxley wished that this scientific education should
begin at an early period of every child's training.
In 1869 he wrote :

"Let every child be instructed in those general views of the
pheenomena of nature for which we have no exact English
name. The nearest approximation to a name for what I mean
which we possess is physical geography ; the Germans have
a better, 'Erdkunde' (earth knowledge or geology in its
etymological sense), that is to say, a general knowledge of the
earth, and what is on it and in it and about it. If anyone
who has experience of the ways of young children will call
to mind their questions, he will find that so far as they can
be put in any scientific category, they will come under this
head of ' Erdkunde.' The child asks, ' What is the moon,
and why does it shine ? ' ' What is this water, and where
does it run ? ' ' What is the wind ? ' ' What makes these
waves in the sea ? ' ' Where does this animal live, and what
is the use of that plant ? ' And if not snubbed and stunted by

Science Primers 171

being told not to ask foolish questions, there is no limit to the
intellectual craving of a young child ; nor any bounds to the
slow but solid accretion of knowledge and development of
the thinking faculty in this way. To all such questions,
answers which are necessarily incomplete, though true as far
as they go, may be given by any teacher whose ideas repre-
sent real knowledge and not mere book learning : and a
panoramic view of nature, accompanied by a strong infusion
of the scientific habit of mind, may thus be placed within the
reach of every child of nine or ten."

Ill 1880 Huxley, in association with Professor Ros-
coe, the chemist, and Professor Balfour Stewart, the
physicist, took a great practical step toward securing
the widest possible extension of elementar}^ knowledge
in science. They became general editors, for the Eng-
lish publishing house of Macmillan, of a series of
"Science Primers." These were written in simple
language, suitable for those with no preliminary know-
ledge of science, but were the work of the chief au-
thorities in the leading branches of science. They
were published at what was then the phenomenally
cheap price of a shilling, and thej^ sold in almost in-
credible ntimbers. Huxley himself wrote the intro-
ductory volume to this great series of tracts, taking
for his subject the simplest and most natural phenomena
of the world and the simplest chains of catise and
effect that can be observed around us. The keynote
of the little book was that knowledge of nature could
be gained only by observation and experiment, and
that for these the ordinary things in the world around
us provided ample material. A few j^ears later he
wrote a more advanced volume on the same subject.
He had now found an English name for the German
Erdkunde, and his book on Physiography was sim-
ply an account of the leading things and forces of

172 Thomas Henry Huxley

nature. A traveller set down in a foreign land will at
once get into difficulties unless he has provided him-
self with a guide to the geograph)-, the manners and
customs, and the regulations of the country in which
he finds himself. Huxley's aim was to provide a
.similar guide to nature ; an outline of elementary
knowledge of the world into which we all come as
strangers. He wrote of force and energy, of the forms
of water, of heat and cold, of the atmosphere, of winds
and tides and weather, and of the main features of the
lives of plants and animals. There was nothing new
in what he wrote ; he simply took from the chief
sciences their leading principles and elementary facts,
and set them forth in plain and simple language so
that all could read and miderstand. The novelty was
that an attempt should be made to bring the.se facts
within the reach of all. The idea proved extremely
infectious ; in Europe and America, in many languages
and by many authors, Huxley's main lines were fol-
lowed, with the result that a new branch of education,
and almost of science, was created.

The bod}^ of man and the processes of life, in the
earlier part of the century, were almost as unknown
to most people as were the structure of the earth and
the great proce.s.ses of nature. What was known of
human anatomy and physiology was contained in
ponderous treatises, written in difficult and technical
language suitable only for students of medicine and
doctors. It was thought to be not only unnecessary
but slightly coarse for those not in the profession to
know anything of the viscera of digestion, circulation,
and so forth, Huxley laid low this great superstition
by his Elementary Lessons m Physiology, a little vol-
ume first published in 1S66, which ran through many

Elementary Physiology i j^t

editions. In it he wrote primarily for teachers and
learners in boys' and girls' schools, and selected from
the great bulk of knowledge and opinion called hu-
man physiology only the important and well-estab-
lished truths. So successful was he in his selection
that, notwithstanding the immense increase in know-
ledge since he wrote, the book still remains an adequate
and useful elementary treatise, and by this time must
have given their main knowledge of the human body
to hundreds and thousands of readers who otherwise
would have remained ignorant.

The books of which we have been writing were ad-
dressed to the general public, but, in addition, Huxley
wrote several, of which three are specially important,
for those students who devote themselves specially to
anatomy. T/ic Crayfish, his famous volume in the
International Scientific Series, has been called by Pro-
fessor Howes, the assistant and successor of Huxley
at the Royal College of Science, " probably the best
biological treatise ever written." Many naturalists
have written elaborate monographs on single animals :
Lyonet worked for years on the willow caterpillar,
vStrauss Durckheim devoted an even minuter attention
to the common cockchafer, and the great Bojanus
investigated almost every fibre in the structure of the
tortoise. The volumes produced by these anatomists
were valuable and memorable, and occupy an hon-
oured place in the library of science, but Huxley's
aim was wider and greater. He showed how careful
stud}^ of one of the commonest and most insignificant
of animals leads, step by step, from every-day know-
ledge to the widest generali.sations and the mo.st diffi-
cult problems of zoology. He made study of a single
creature an introduction to a whole science, and taught

174 Thomas Henry Huxley

students to regard any form of life not merely as a
highly complicated and deeply interesting anatomical
study, but as a creature that is only one out of an in-
numerable host of living things, every fibre in its
bod}', ever)^ rhythm in its functions proclaiming the
degree and nature of its relationship to other animals.
R. Louis Stevenson, writing of his native town, tried to
give "a vision of Edinburgh, not as you see her, in
the midst of a little neighbourhood, but as a boss upon
the round world, with all Europe and the deep sea for
her surroundings. For every place is a centre to the
earth, whence highways radiate, or ships set sail for
foreign ports ; the limit of a parish is not more imagin-
ary than the frontier of an empire." It is this wider
sweep, this attempt to see and to teach not merely the
facts about things but the relations of these facts to the
similar facts in other things, that makes the difference
between the new knowledge and the old. The quest-
ions to be asked and answered are not merely, What
are the structures in this animal ? but, How and why do
they come to be what they are ? Huxley was a ruthless
enemy of the books and teachers which or who made
the mere acquisition of details of knowledge their chief
object.

" I remember," he wrote, " iu my youtb there were detest-
able books which ought to have been burued by the hands of
the common hangman, for they contained questions and an-
swers to be learned by heart, of this sort, 'What is a horse?
The horse is termed Equiis caballiis ; belongs to the class
Mammalia ; order, Pachydermata ; family, Solidungula.' Was
an}- human being the wiser for learning that magic formula?
Was he not more foolish inasmuch as he was deluded into
taking words for knowledge ? "

Huxley himself admitted his diflScuIty in remembering

The Mitral Valve 175

apparently meaningless facts, and occasionally aided
his memory by inventing for them a humorous signif-
icance. Professor Howes relates a story of this kind.
While examining the papers of candidates for some
examination, Huxley came across one in which the
mitral or bicuspid valve of the heart was erroneously
described as being placed in the right cavity, " Poor
little beggar," said Huxley; "I never could get
them myself until I reflected that a bishop could never
be in the right." This insistence on the uselessness
of formal knowledge applied only to those who were
being taught or who were learning from books or
lectures. Of the value and discipline of knowledge of
facts gained at first hand from objects themselves
either in original investigation or with the aid of
books, Huxley had the highest possible opinion. By
such a method of work alone he believed it possible to
distinguish what we believe on authority from what
we have convinced ourselves to be true, and, as we
shall see later, he regarded it as the most important
duty of a man to have acquired the habit of classifying
the mass of ideas in his brain into those which he
knew and those which he thought to be true from
having read or heard or imagined them.

The two other of the three great treatises for
anatomical students are the Manual of the Ayiatomy
of Vertebrated Animals, published in 187 1, and the
Manual of the Anatomy of Invertebratcd Animals,
published in 1877. Of these two volumes it is suffi-
cient to say that they formed the chief introduction to
the study of animal zoology for many years, and that
a large number of the best-known zoologists of the end
of this century received from them their first instruc-
tion in the science. As text-books they have been

176 Thomas Henry Huxley

superseded lately by larger volumes in which there is
found more space for some of the recent advances in
knowledge, especially comparative embryology, and
the more intricate knowledge of the structure of the
soft parts of marine invertebrates made possible b}' the
newer and more successful methods ofpresennng de-
licate tissues. Just before Huxley ceased his regular
work as a teacher at the Royal College of Science, there
arrived a series of marine embryos, beautifully pre-
served and prepared for microscopic work by the zoolo-
gists at the International Zoological Station at Naples.
Huxley is reported to have exclaimed at their beauty,
and to have said : "You 3'oung men cannot realise your
advantages ; you have brought to you for stud\' at your
leisure in London, creatures that I had to lash ni}- mi-
croscope to the mast to get a glimpse of." Huxley's
books were written for students with fewer advantages,
and, naturall}', laid more stress on the harder skeletal
parts and such structures as could be more easily pre-
served ; but with this inevitable limitation they still
serve as luminous and comprehensive guides to the sub-
jects of which they treat. There is no doubt but that if
he had been a younger man wdien the new technical
methods made their appearance, he would have
adopted them and their results in his volumes. One
of the first great pieces of work which utilised methods
more like those now used in all laboratories than those
employed during the greater part of Huxley's life as a
teacher was the classical investigation by Van Beneden
into the changes in the egg of Ascaris which accom-
pany the process of fertilisation. When Huxley read
the memoir he exlaimed, "All this by the use of
glacial acetic acid — is it possible ! " At once, Professor
Howes relates, he repeated the whole investigation

Microtomes 177

himself, and, when satisfied, declared that the " history
of the histological investigation of the future would be
the history of its methods." Not only have the chemi-
cal substances used in preparing tissues for examina-
tion greatly increased since Huxley's time as an active
worker, but a very important method of investigation
has come into general use. In Huxley's time tissues
or animals too large or too opaque to be examined
microscopically as whole structures were either teased
by needles or were cut with a razor by hand into com-
paratively thick slices. The process of cutting, how-
ever practised the operator, was tedious and uncertain,
and it was almost impossible to cut a piece of tissue
into a series of thin slices without losing or destroying
considerable portions. Microtomes, with various acces-
sory mechanical appliances, have now been invented,
and by means of these not only are slices of great
tenuity made with ease, but there is little difficulty in
cutting the most delicate organism into a ribbon of
consecutive slices. Such new methods have made
almost a revolution in the study of zoology, particularly
of the lower forms of life and of the embryonic stages
of higher animals, and books written before these
methods became common have naturally been super-
seded.

Huxley did far more for the teaching of science thau
the preparation of books, however useful these were.
He was the practical inventor of the laboratory system
of teaching zoological science, and all over the world
the methods invented by him have been adopted in
university laboratories and technical schools. He had
always declared that since zoology was a physical sci-
ence, the method of studying it must needs be analo-
gous to that which is followed in other physical sciences.

178 Thomas Henry Huxley

If a man wishes to be a chemist, it is necessary not
only that he should read chemical books and attend
chemical lectures, but that he should actually perform
the fundamental experiments in the laboratory for him-
self, and thus learn exactly what the words which he
reads in his books and hears from his teachers, mean,
" If you want a man to be a tea-merchant, you don't
tell him to read books about China or about tea, but you
put him into a tea- merchant's office where he has the
handling, the smelling, and the tasting of tea. With-
out the sort of knowledge which can be gained only in
this practical wa}-, his exploits as a tea-merchant will
soon come to a bankrupt termination." The great and
obvious difficulty in tlie practical teaching of biology
appeared to be the immense number of different kinds
of animals and plants in existence. A human life
would not suffice for the examination of a hundredth
part of these. Huxley met the difficulty by the
" type " system.

"There are certainly more than loo.ocx) species of insects,
and yet anyone who knows one insect, if a properly chosen
one, will be able to have a fair conception of the struct-
ure of the whole. I do not mean to say he will know that
structure thoroughly, or as well as is desirable that he should
know it ; but he will have enough real knowledge to enable
him to understand what he reads, to have genuine images in
his mind of these structures which become so variously modi-
fied in all the foims of insects he has not seen. In fact, there
are such things as types of form among animals and vegetables,
and for the purpose of getting a definite knowledge of what
constitutes the leading modifications of animal and plant life,
it is not needful to examine more than a comparatively small
number of animals and plants."

The type system in itself was not absolutely new.
Rolleston, the Linacre professor at Oxford, in his Fonns

Rolleston's Types i 79

of Animal Life had devised the method of teaching
comparative anatomy by the study of a graded series
of animals. But his method depended on the exist-
ence of a series of dissections and preparations made
by a skilled craftsman ; the tradition of teaching by
authority instead of by investigation was maintained,
although the authority of books and lectures was aided
by museum specimens in glass bottles, the actual basis
of the book being a series of dissections prepared by
\lx. Charles Robertson, Rolleston's laboratory assist-
ant, for the great International Exhibition of i86r.
The authorities of Huxley's students were to be found
in nature itself. The green scum from the nearest
gutter, a handful of weed from a pond, a bean-plant,
some fresh-water mud, a frog, and a pigeon were the
ultimate authorities of his course. His students were
taught how to observe them, and how to draw and
record their observations. However familiar the ob-
jects, each student had to verify every fact afresh for
himself. The business of the teacher was explanation
of the methods of verification, insistence on the ac-
complishment of verification. It was a training in the
immemorial attitude of the scientific mind, codified
by Huxley and made an integral part in national
education.

As a matter of fact it was comparatively late in
his life as a teacher that Huxle}' had complete oppor-
tunity for putting into practice his scheme for the
laboratory teaching of biology. In 1854 there was no
laboratory attached to the Natural History Department
of the School of Mines. lycctures alone were given,
and the only opportunity the student had of any
practical acquaintance with the facts was in a short
interview with the professor at the lecture table after

I So Thomas Henry Huxley

the lecture. This condition continned practically to
1872. But a few years before that Huxley and his
colleagues got up a kind of pronunciamento deploring
the existing state of affairs. In his evidence before
the Royal Conunission of 1S70 Huxley said : " There is
a complete want in the School of Mines, as it now ex-
ists, of an}' means of teaching several of the subjects
practically. For example, I am set there to teach
natural history without a biological laboratory and
without the means of shewing a single dissection."
Against strong internal opposition and at considerable
pecuniary loss Huxley and some of his colleagues suc-
ceeded, in 1872, in getting the School of Mines trans-
ferred to South Kensington, where it became the Royal
College of Science. For the first course of instruction
given in the new buildings, Huxley obtained the aid
of Prof. M. Foster, Prof. Rutherford, and Prof. Ray
Lankester. The laboratory course originated by Hux-
ley and shaped by him with these three distinguished
assistants became the model of the regular courses
given subsequently, and, with various slight modifi-
cations, has since been adopted almost universally.
Later on, Huxley described it as follows :

" I lecture to a class of students daily for about four months
and a half, and my class have, of course, their text-books ; but
the essential part of the whole teaching, and that which I re-
gard as really the most important part of it, is a laboratory for
practical work, which is simply a room with all the appliances
needed for ordinary dissection. We have tables properly ar-
ranged in regard to light, microscopes and dissecting instru-
ments, and we work through the structure of a certain number
of plants and animals. As, for example, among the plants we
take the yeast-plant, a Protococcus, a common mould, a Chara,
a fern, and some flowering plant ; among animals we exam-
ine such things as an Amoeba, a Vorticella, and a fresh-water

Huxley's Types i8i

polyp. We dissect a starfish, an earthworm, a snail, a squid,
and a fresh-water mussel. We examine a lobster and a cra}--
fish, and a black beetle. We go on to a common skate, a cod-
fish, a frog, a tortoise, a pigeon, and a rabbit, and that takes us
about all the time we have to give. The purpose of this course
is not to make skilled dissectors, but to give everj' student a
clear and definite conception, by means of sense images, of the
characteristic structure of each of the leading modifications of
the animal kingdom ; and that is perfectly possible by going
no further than the length of that list of forms which I have
enumerated. If a man knows the structure of the animals I
have mentioned, he has a clear and exact, however limited ap-
prehension of the essential features of the organization of all
those great divisions of the animal and vegetable kingdoms to
which the forms I have mentioned severally belong. And it
then becomes possible to him to read with profit ; because every
time he meets with the name of a structure, he has a definite
image in his mind of what the name means in the particular
creature he is reading about, and therefore the reading is not
mere reading. It is not mere repetition of words ; but every
term employed in the description, we will say of a horse, or of
an elephant, will call up the image of the things he had seen
in the rabbit, and he is able to form a distinct conception of
that which he has not seen, as a modification of that which he
has seen."

Huxley himself was originalh- a medical man ; all
through his life he was chiefly interested in the biologi-
cal sciences which underlie a scientific practice of medi-
cine, and as teacher and examiner he had much to do
with the shaping of medical education in London.
Acting in various public capacities, as a member of
commissions dealing with medical education, or as a
witness before them, in magazine articles and in public
speeches he made many contributions to the problems
to be faced in medical education. Some of these re-
lated to the conditions peculiar to medical training in
lyondon. In the greatest cit}^ of the world there was

1 82 Thomas Henry Huxley

during Hiixle3''s life and there is still nothing compar-
able with the great universities of Europe and Amer-
ica, of Scotland and Ireland. Some dozen hospitals,
supported partly by endowments, partly by charities,
attempt each to maintain a complete, independent
medical school. As the requirements of medical edu-
cation in staff, laboratories, and general equipment has
advanced, these hospitals have made heroic efforts to
adv^ance with them. Notwithstanding the zeal and
public spirit of the staff and managers of the hospitals,
this want of system has naturally resulted in a multi-
plication of inefficient institutions and a number of
makeshift arrangements. Huxle^^ repeatedly urged the
concentration of all this diffuse effort into a few centres,
but this inevitable reform has not j^et become possible.

A second important consideration, and one that has
a much wider application, relates to the kind of person
by whom the scientific sides of medical teaching should
be given. Primitively, all the instruction to medical
students was given by those actually engaged in the
practice of medicine. Huxley was strongly of the
opinion that the teachers of anatomj-, physiology,
chemistry, and so forth, should be specialists devoted
to these subjects for life, and not merely surgeons and
physicians who engaged in teaching until their practice
grew sufficiently to monopolise their attention.

" I get every year," he said, " the elaborate reports of Henle
and Meissner — volumes of I suppose 400 pages altogther —
aud they consist merelj- of abstracts of the memoirs and works
which have been written on Anatomy and Physiology — only
abstracts of them. How is a man to keep up his acquaintance
with all that is doing in the physiological world — in a world
advancing with enormous strides every day aud every hour —
if he has to be distracted with the cares of practice ? "

Specialists as Teachers i8

o

There would always be found men, he declared, who
would make the choice between the wealth which may
come by successful practice and a modest competenc}-,
when that modest competency was to be combined
with a scientific career and the means of advancino-
knowledge. It was to those who made the latter
choice that he would entrust the teaching of the
sciences underlying medicine ; partly because from
the mere mechanical reason of time these men would
be better able to keep pace with the most recent ad-
vances in knowledge, and partly because their teaching
would be stimulated by their own work in advancing
knowledge. In this great matter the world is rapidly
advancing towards the standard of Huxley ; as each
new appointment is made it becomes more and more
probable that the man chosen will be a teacher and
investigator rather than a practitioner.

In another general question of the politics of medical
education Huxley took a strong line, and the tendency
of change is toward his view. One of the first results
of the awakening of medical education in the middle of
this century was a tendency to throw an almost in-
tolerable burden of new subjects upon the medical
student. In the revolt from the old apprenticeship
system, in which the student, from the very first, gave
his chief attention to practice, and was left almost to
himself to pick up a scanty knowledge of the princi-
ples and theories underlying his profession, the pendu-
lum swung too far the other way, and there was almost
no branch of the biological and physical sciences in
which he was not expected to go through a severe
training. On the old system the greater part of his
time was spent in the wards of the hospital ; on the
new system it was only at an advanced stage of his

184 Thomas Henry Huxley

career that he entered the wards at all, a great part of
his time and energy being spent in the purel}^ scientific
teaching of the medical college. Huxley, although
he had largely aided in the overthrow of the happy-go-
lucky older S3'stem, of which Mr. Bob Sawyer was no
exaggerated t3-pe, was equall}^ severe on the reckless
extensions of the new system. " If I were a despot,"
he said, " I would cut down the theoretical branches to
a very considerable extent." He would discard com-
parative anatom)^ and botany, materia medica, and
chemistr}' and physics, except as applied to physiology,
from the medical student's course. At first sight, this
seems a hard saying, but it is to be remembered that
at that time the normal curriculum of a medical student
lasted only four 3-ears, a space of time barel}^ sufficient
for the necessary minimum of purely medical and
surgical work. Huxley's view was that chemistry
and physics, botany and zoology, .should be part of
the general education, not of the special medical
education; he wished students to spend one or two
years after their ordinary career at school in work
on these elementar}^ scientific subjects, and then to
begin their medical course free from the burden of
extra-professional subjects. With certain limits due
to the different local conditions in different teaching
centres Huxley's system is being adopted. In most
cases the authorities in medical education are unable to
leave the whole responsibility of the elementary educa-
tion in science to the schools from W'hich medical stu-
dents come, as the conditions under which scientific
subjects are still taught in schools leave much to be
desired. The average length of the medical curric-
ulum has been extended and the elementary scientific
subjects are taken first, sometimes at the medical

Science and Culture l^^y

colleges, sometimes in the scientific departments of uni-
versities. The interesting general point of view is that
Huxley, although himself a biologist and teacher of
biology, took too broad an outlook on the general
policy of education to insist upon his own subject to
the detriment of the precise practical objects of the •>\r'
training of medical students. ~C^

In the days of Huxley's greatest activity, while by
the natural force of events and b}^ his special efforts
science was becoming more and more recognised as a
necessary and important branch of general education,
the cry was raised against it that scientific education
was not capable of giving what is called culture. A
scientific man was regarded as a mere scientific special-
ist, and science was considered to have no place in, and
in fact to be an enemy of, "liberal education." In 1880,
at Birmingham, Huxley attacked this view in a .speech
delivered at the opening of the Ma.son College. Sir
Josiah Ma.son, the benevolent founder of that great in-
stitution, had made it one of the conditions of the
foundation that the College should make no provi-sion
for "mere literary instruction and education." This
gave Huxley a text for raising the whole question of
the relation of science to culture. He declared that he
held verv .stronglv bv two convictions.

'a' J

"The first is, that neither the discipline nor the subject-
matter of classical education is of such direct value to the
student of physical science as to justify the expenditure of
valuable time on either ; and the second is, that for the pur-
pose of attaining real culture, au exclusively scientific educa-
tion is at least as effectual as an exclusively literary education."

He quoted from Matthew Arnold, then in the zenith
of his fame as a chief apostle of culture, and shewed

1 86 Thomas Henry Huxley

that there were two propositions involved in the
' ' literary ' ' view of culture. The first was that a ' ' crit-
icism of life " was the essence of culture ; the second,
that literature contained the materials which sufficed
for the construction of such a criticism. With the
first proposition he had no dispute, taking the view
that culture was something quite different from learn-
ing or technical skill. " It implies the possession of
an ideal, and the habit of critically estimating the
value of things by comparison with a theoretic stand-
ard. Perfect culture should supply a complete theory
of life, based upon a clear knowledge alike of its possi-
bilities and its limitations." Against the second
proposition he urged in the first place that it was self-
evident that after having learned all that Greek, Ro-
man, and Eastern antiquity have thought and said,
and all that modern literature has to tell us, it was still
necessary to have a deeper foundation for criticism of
life. An acquaintance wdth what physical science had
done, particularly in later years, was as necessary to
criticism of life as any of the literary materials. Next,
following the biological habit of examining anything
by studying its development, he shewed how the con-
nection between "culture" and study of classical
literature had come into existence. For many cent-
uries Latin grammar, with logic and rhetoric, studied
through Latin, were the fundamentals of education.
A liberal education was possible only through study of
the language in which all or nearly all the materials
for it were written. With the changes produced by the
Renascence there came a battle between Latin and
Greek, and Greek came to be part of a liberal educa-
tion. Later on, there came a similar battle between
the classical and modern languages, and now the

Science and Culture

187

modern languages have included and absorbed all the
necessary material for knowledge and criticism. Those
who chng to classics as the basis of culture and educa-
tion are clinging to old weapons long after these have
ceased to be eflfective, simpl}^ because at one time in
history only these weapons were available in the strug-
gle for knowledge.

CHAPTER XI

GENERAL PROBLEMS OF EDUCATION

Establishment of Compulsory Education in England — The
Religious Controversy — Huxley Advocates the Bible with-
out Theology — His Compromise on the " Cowper-Temple "
Clause — Influence of the New Criticism — Science and Art
Instruction — Training of Teachers — University Education
— The Baltimore Address — Technical Education — So-called
"Applied Science" — National Systems of Education as
" Capacity-Catchers."

IN the last chapter, the special relation of Huxley to
scientific education was described, and, naturally
enough, it is in special connection with scientific edu-
cation that his influence is best known. But he was
keenly interested in all the larger problems of general,
university, and technical education, and he played a
great part in- shaping the lines upon which the.se
problems have been solved in England.

In the years immediatel)^ before 1870, all England
was wrestling with the great problem of elementary
education, in the arrangements for which it was far
behind not only the leading European countries but
even its sister-kingdom, Scotland. In 1870 there came
into operation an Act of Parliament for the regula-
tion of elementary education under the stipervision
of locally elected .school boards. Hitherto elementary

School Children and Dogma 189

education had been controlled by the Established
Church, and by other denominational religious bodies,
and the quality and quantity of the instruction pro-
vided, for financial and various other reasons, had been
extremely unsatisfactor}'. But a long and furious
battle had raged around the religious question ; ele-
mentary education was now to be national, compuls-
ory, and universal ; where religious bodies maintained
schools that complied with certain fixed standards of
efficiency, attendance of children at these was to be
regarded as satisfactory^, and in addition to the ordin-
ary subjects, such theological and religious teaching
as the supporting bodies chose might be added.
But in the schools for all and sundry, under the
control of boards representing the whole population,
and deriving that part of their income represented by
the subscriptions of the religious bodies in the denom-
inational schools from public rates, levied on the whole
population, was any definite creed to be inculcated ?
The extreme Church party, perhaps naturally, held that
the creed established by law in the land should be taught
in these new schools ; extreme supporters of other
creeds, and a majority of ordinar}^ people of all creeds
or of no creeds, objected to a new establishment of a
sectarian doctrine, even though that sectarian doctrine
were the doctrine of the national religion. The final
result of the dispute as codified in the Act of Parlia-
ment was what was known as the Cowper- Temple
Clause : " No religious catechism or religious formulary
which is distinctive of any particular denomination
shall be taught in the school." The actual value of
any clause, however it ma}- appear to be a fair com-
promise, depends on the spirit in which it is practically
interpreted, and no sooner had the Act been passed

190 Thomas Henry Huxley

than the l^attle was renewed again over the interpreta-
tion of the clanse. Many of the Church controversial-
ists held that the liberal or more advanced party
intended to exclude all reference to the Bible or to
religion, on the plea that some sect could be found to
which the most attenuated expression of religion would
appear to be against the plain meaning of the clause,
and Huxley, who had been in the forefront of the con-
troversy, and who was a candidate for the first I^ondon
School Board, was decried as an enemy of the Bible
and of all religion and morality because he had ex-
pressed what he called a secular interpretation of the
clause. In an article published in the Contemporary
\ Revieiv immediately after the election, Huxley ex-
plained precisely what he took the clause to mean, and,
afterwards, at all events during the existence of the
Board to which he was elected, succeeded in carrying
out his intentions in the main.

His first general point was to deprecate the action of
those extremists of both sides who tried to make the
education of children a mere battle-ground of religious
dogmas. He then laid down what he conceived to be
the lines of most general utility upon which, under the
provisions of the Act, the education of children should
be conducted. In the foreground he placed physical
training and drill, as of supreme importance to young
children, especially in the case of the poor children of
large towns.

" All the conditions of the lives of such are unfavourable to,
their physical well-being. They are badly lodged, badly
housed, badly fed, and live from one year's end to another in
bad air, without a chance of a change. They have no play-
grounds ; they amuse themselves with marbles and chuck-
farthing, instead of cricket and hare-and-hounds ; and if it were

Physical Training 191

not for the wonderful instinct which leads all poor children of
tender years to throw themselves under the feet of cab-horses
whenever they can, I know not how they would learn to use
their limbs with agility."

This, humanitarianism as it was, was not the mere
emotional sentiment of the typical humanitarian ; he
went on to give the soundest practical reasons for
physical development.

"Whatever doubts people may entertain about the efEcacy
of natural selection, there can be none about artificial selec-
tion ; and the breeder who should attempt to make, or keep
up, a fine stock of pigs, or sheep, under the conditions to
which the children of the poor are exposed, would be the
laughing stock even of the bucolic mind. Parliament has
already done something in this direction by declining to be an
accomplice in the asphyxiation of school children. It refuses
to make any grant to a school in which the cubical con-
tents of the school-room are inadequate to allow of proper
respiration."

He wished to see physical training put on the same
system.

The second great point upon which he laid stress
was the necessity of providing training in domestic
economy, cookery, and other household accomplish-
ments, for poor girls. These demands of Huxley seem
simple and obvious, now that by his efforts and the
efforts of others they have been accomplished, but in
England, even thirty j^ears ago, it required more than
an ordinary prevision and boldness to insist upon them.

Huxley passed next to the burning question of the
time. He treated it in the broadest and least sectarian
spirit,

" The boys and girls for whose education the School Boards
have to provide, have not merely to discharge domestic duties,

192 Thomas Henry Huxley

but each of them is a member of a social and political organis-
ation of great complexity, and has, in futnre life, to fit him-
self into that organisation, or be crushed by it. To this end it
is surely needful, not only that they should be made acquaiuted
with the elementary laws of conduct, but that their affections
should be trained, so as to love with all their hearts that con-
duct which tends to the attainment of the highest good for
themselves and their fellow-men, and to hate with all their
hearts that opposite course of actiuu which is fraught with
evil."

He then proceeded to point out the distinction be-
tween the affection which is called religion, and the
.science which is called theology, and, without entering
into the question as to whether the latter were or were
not a true science, he insisted on the danger of a con-
fusion between the two.

'* We are divided into two parties — the advocates of so-called
' religious ' teaching on the one hand, and those of so-called
' secular ' teaching on the other. And both parties seem to me
to be not only hopelessly wrong, but in such a position that if
either succeeded completely, it would discover, before many
years were over, that it had made a great mistake and done
serious evil to the cause of education. For, leaving aside the
more far-seeing minority on either side, what the religious
party is crying for is mere theology, under the name of religion ;
while the secularists have unwisely and wrongfully admitted
the assumption of their opponents, and demand the abolition
of all religious teaching, when they only want to be free of the-
ology— burning your ship to get rid of the cockroaches." . . .
"If I were compelled to choose for one of my own children,
between a school in which real religious instruction is given,
and one without it, I should prefer the former, even though
the child might have to take a good deal of theology with it.
Nine-tenths of a dose of bark is mere half-rotten wood ; but
one swallows it for the sake of the particles of quinine, the
beneficial effect of which may be weakened, but is not de-
stroyed, by the wooden dilution, unless in the case of a few

Elementary Schools 193

exceptionally tender stomachs. Hence, when the great mass
of the English people declare that they want to have the child-
ren in the elementary schools taught the Bible, and when it
is plain from the terms of the Act, the debates in and out of
Parliament, and especially the emphatic declarations of the
Vice-President of the Council that it was intended that such
Bible-teaching should be permitted, unless good cause for pro-
hibiting it could be shewn, I do not see what reason there is
for opposing that wish."

He went on to explain that, although he had always
been strongly in favour of secular education, by that
term he meant only education without theology, and
he praised the English Bible in language as noble as
has ever been applied to it by the most ardent of
theologians.

"The Pagan moralists lack life and colour, and even the
noble Stoic, Marcus Antoninus, is too high and refined for an
ordinary child. Take the Bible as a whole ; make the severest
deductions which fair criticism can dictate for shortcomings
and positive errors ; eliminate, as a sensible lay-teacher would
do, if left to himself, all that is not desirable for children to
occupy themselves with ; and there still remains in this old
literature a vast residuum of moral beauty and grandeur.
And then consider the great historical fact that, for three centu-
ries, this book has been woven into the life of all that is best
and noblest in English history ; that it has become the national
epic of Britain, and is as familiar to noble and simple, from
Land's End to John-o'-Groat's House, as Dante and Tasso once
were to the Italians ; that it is written in the noblest and purest
English, and abounds in exquisite beauties of mere literary
form ; and, finally, that it forbids the veriest hind who never
left his village to be ignorant of the existence of other coun-
tries and other civilisations, and of a great past, stretching
back to the furthest limits of the oldest nations in the world.
By the study of what other book could children be so much
humanised and made to feel that each figure in that vast his-
torical procession fills, like themselves, but a momentary space
13

194 Thomas Henry Huxley

in the interval between two eternities ; and earns the blessings
and the curses of all time, according to its effort to do good
and hate evil, even as they also are earning their payment for
their work."

lyastly, he laid down the lines of the general educa-
tion to be given. He pointed otit that already in the
existing schools a very considerable burden of work
was imposed on the children in the form of catechism,
lists of the kings of Israel, geograph}^ of Palestine,
and that when these fantastic modes of education had
been eliminated there was plenty of time and energ)'
to be emploj'ed. The instruction in physical training
was more than half play ; that in the domestic subjects
had an engrossing interest of its own. He proposed,
first, the necessary discipline in the means for acquiring
knowledge, the tools for emplo}-ing it, that is to sa}-,
reading, writing, and arithmetic. After that, he be-
lieved that a certain amount of knowledge, of intellect-
ual discipline, and of artistic training should be conveyed
in the elementary schools, and for these purposes he
proposed to teach some rudiments of physical science,
drawing, and singing.

In most respects the progress of primar^^ education
in England has been a continuous progress along these
lines suggested by Huxley, and he may be regarded as
in this fashion one of the great shapers of the destinies
of his race, for nothing can have a bearing more im-
portant on the character and fate of a race than the
manner of training provided for the mas.ses of indi-
viduals compo.sing it. It is onl}' in the matter of the
religious instrtiction that the course of events has been
widely different from the neutral exposition of the
Bible as suggested bj^ him. In 1870 a great majority
of the people of England who reflected upon the

Religious Instruction 195

matter at all, and all those who accepted current ideas
without reflection, accepted the Bible as an inspired,
direct, and simple authorit}^ on all great matters of
faith and morality. Therefore, when Huxley, as by
far the most important man among those who advo-
cated a secular education, was an advocate and not in
the least an opponent of Bible teaching, they were well
content to let the matter rest. There were, it is true, a
certain number of zealots who entered the boards with
the avowed purpose, on the one hand, of getting as
much dogmatic teaching and interpretation added as it
might be possible to smuggle in, and, on the other, to
reduce the simplest Bible teaching to a minimum.
But the vast majority of persons were out of sympa-
thy with these fanaticisms. Since 1870, however, a
gradual change has occurred in the attitude of the ma-
jority to the Bible in England. The growth of the
new criticism and of knowledge of it has produced the
result that now only a small minorit}' of reflecting peo-
ple in England accept the Bible in the old simple way ;
the majority thinks that it requires interpretation and
explanation by the authority of the Church. And so
a new battle over dogma has begun ; moderate Church
people no longer accept the compromise of Huxley,
but strive for an interpretation which must be dog-
matic, and there is a new dispute as to what may be
regarded as undenominational religion. When a ma-
jority of reasonable persons accepted Huxley's suggest-
ions of simple Bible teaching they did so not because
they believed, as he did, that the Bible was simply
great literature, great tradition, and great morality, but
because they believed it to be direct, inspired author-
it3\ It is a curious coincidence that Huxlej^ himself
did so much to spread knowledge of the new criticism,

196 Thomas Henry Huxley

and that a first result of this diffusion was to overthrow
the compromise arranged largely by his influence, and
which for many years provided a middle way in which
sensible persons avoided the extremes of theological
and anti-theological zealots.

Early in the course of his career as a member of the
London School Board, Huxley crystallised his views
as to the general policy of education in a phrase which
perhaps has done more than any other phrase ever in-
vented to bring home to men's minds the ideal of a
national system of education. " I conceive it to be
our duty," he said, " to make a ladder from the gutter
to the university along which any child may climb."'
We have seen the nature of his views as to the lowest
rungs of this ladder ; we may now turn to his work
and views as to the higher stages. He expressed these
views in occasional speeches and articles, and he had
many important opportunities in aiding to carry them
into actual practice. He was a member of a num-
ber of important Royal Commissions : Commission on
the Ro3'al College of Science for Ireland, 1866 ; Com-
mission on Science and Art Instruction in Ireland, 1868;
Royal Commission on Scientific Instruction and the
Advancement of Science, 1870-75 ; Royal Commission
to enquire into the Universities of Scotland, 1876-78 ;
Royal Commission on the Medical Acts, 1881-82.
From the beginning, he was closely associated with
the Science and Art Department, the operations of
which threw a web of education, intermediate between
primary and universit}' education, all over Britain.
A number of the teachers under that department were
trained by him, and as examiner to the department
he took the greatest care to reduce to a minimum the
evils necessarily attendant on the mode of payment by

University Education 197

results. A certain number of teachers made it their
chief effort to secure the largest possible number of
grants. Huxle}^ regarded these as poachers of the
worst kind, and did all he could to foil them. He did
all he could to promote systematic practical instruction
in the classes, and to aid teachers who desired to learn
their business more thoroughl}'. He insisted again
and again upon the popular nature of the classes ;
their great advantage was that they were accessible to
all who chose to avail themselves of them after work-
ing hours, and that they brought the means of instruc-
tion to the doors of the factories and workshops.
The subjects which he considered of most importance
were foreign languages, drawing, and elementary sci-
ences, and he wished them to be used first of all by
those who were handicraftsmen and who therefore
left the elementary schools at the age of thirteen or
fourteen.

In a lecture given at the formal opening of the Johns
Hopkins University at Baltimore in 1876, and in a Rec-
torial address to the University of Aberdeen two 3^ears
earlier, Huxley laid down the general lines of univers-
ity education as he conceived it. He began by sup-
posing that a good primary education had already
been received.

"Sucti an education should enable an average boy of fifteen
or sixteen to read and write his own language with ease and
accuracy, and with a sense of literary excellence derived from
the study of our classic writers ; to have a general acquaintance
with the history of his own country and with the great laws of
social existence ; to have acquired the rudiments of the phys-
ical and psychological sciences, and a fair knowledge of ele-
mentary arithmetic and geometry. He should have obtained
an acquaintance with logic rather by example than by precept ;

198 Thomas Henry Huxley

while the acquirement of the elements of music aud drawing
should have been a pleasure rather than work."

He had not much to say for secondary or intermediate
education, partly because at that time, in England at
least, the secondary schools were in a hopeless state of
incapacity, and differed from primary schools not onl}'
in their greater expense, their adaptation to the class-
spirit which demanded the separation of the boys of
the upper and middle classes from those in the lower
ranks of society, but chiefly in the futility of the
education given at the majority of them. But where
intermediate schools did exist, he demanded that they
should keep on the same wide track of general know-
ledge, not sacrificing one branch of knowledge for
another. He held that the elementary instruction to
which he had referred embraced all the real kinds of
knowledge and mental activit}^ possible to man. The
university could add no new fields of mental activity,
no new departments of knowledge. What it could do
was to intensify and specialise the instruction in each
department.

"Thus literature and philology, represented in the elementary
school by English aloue, in the university will extend over
the ancient and modern languages. History, which like
charity, best begins at home, but, like charity, should not end
there, will ramify into anthropology, archaeology, political
history, and geography, with the history of the growth of the
human mind and of its products, iu the shape of philosophy,
science, aud art, and the university will present to the student
libraries, museums of antiquities, collections of coins, and the
like, which will efficiently subserve these studies. Instruction
in the elements of political economy, a most essential but
hitherto sadly neglected part of elementary education, will
develop in the university into political economy, sociology,
and law. Physical science will have its great divisions, of

Technical Education 199

physical geography, with geology and astronomy ; physics ;
chemistry and biology ; represented not merely by professors
and their lectures, but by laboratories in which the students,
under guidance of demonstrators, will work out facts for them-
selves and come into that direct contact with reality which
constitutes the fundamental distinction of scientific education.
Mathematics will soar into its highest regions ; while the high
peaks of philosophy may be scaled by those whose aptitude
for abstract thought has been awakened by elementary logic.
Finally, schools of pictorial and plastic art, of architecture,
and of music will ofTer a thorough discipline in the principles
and practice of art to those ia whom lies nascent the rare
faculty of aesthetic representation, or the still rarer powers of
creative genius."

Early in the seventie;? the problems connected with
what is called technical education became prominent
in the minds of the most far-seeing of this nation. It
became plain that England was not advancing with
the same strides as some other nations in arts and
manufacttires, and the most obvious difference between
England and the rivals whose advance w'as causing
anxiety lay in her deficiency in education. Science
or knowledge of nattire lies at the root of all the arts
and manufactures, and it was our relation to scientific
teaching and research that required investigation.
Naturally enough, Huxley took the keenest interest
in this question and made large contributions to its
solution, contributions which have not yet been put
completely' into operation. He insisted most strongly
upon a point that we as a nation have not 5'et com-
pletely grasped. There is no difference between afb
plied— science and any other kind of science. The
chemistry of manufactures, the phj'sics of industrial
machiner\% the biolog}' of agrictilture and of fisheries,
are not different from other chemistries and physics and

200 Thomas Henry Huxley

biologies. They are merely special cases of the appli-
cation of the same general fund of knowledge, and
the same general principles of investigation, Huxley
wished that the term " applied science " had never been
invented, or that it could be destroyed. A man cannot
study the chemistr}^ of dyeing or make advances in it
unless he be a thoroughly trained chemist in the full
sense of the word. More than that, many of the great-
est discoveries, using the word "great" as applied to
commercial advantage rather than to abstract progress
in knowledge, have been made by those who were
pursuing research for its own sake rather than for any
immediate commercial advantage to be derived from it.
Hence he regarded it of vital importance, from the
mere point of view of the prosperity of the country,
that there should be a sufficiently large number of
scientific men provided with the means for research in
the shape of income and appliances. The most im-
mediately utilitarian fashion for the nation to encourage
science, was to encourage science in its highest and
most advanced aspects. This meant the endowment
of research and the support of universities and other
institutions in which research might be conducted,
and Huxley strove unceasingly for the benefit of all
such great organisations. One of the last public oc-
casions of his life was his appearance as leader of a
deputation to urge upon the government the formation
of a real university in London which should unite the
scattered institutions of that great city and promote
the highest spheres of the pursuit of knowledge. He
held the view, strongly, that a useful combination was
to be made by uniting the functions of teaching and
investigation. A teacher taught better when his mind
was kept fresh by the advances he himself was making.

Technical Education 201

and an investigator, b)^ having a moderate amount of
teaching to do, gained from the need of forcing his
mind from time to time to take broad surveys of the
whole field a part of which he was engaged in tilling.
The first great object, then, in promoting science so
as to reap the most direct national advantage from it,
was to encourage science in its highest and widest
forms. It cannot be said that England has 3^et learned
this lesson. The number of institutions in German}'
where advanced investigation is continuouslj^ pursued
is absolutely and relatively greater than the number
in England.

The second part of technical education is that to
which general attention is more commonly given. It
consists of the kind of training to be given to the great
army of workers in the country. In regard to this, as
in regard to research work, Huxley insisted on the ab-
sence of distinction between technical or applied sci-
ence and science without such a limiting prefix. So
far as technical instruction meant definite teaching of
a handicraft, he believed that it could be learned satis-
factorily only in the workshop itself.

"The workshop is the ouly real school for a handicraft. The
education which precedes that of the workshop should be en-
tirely devoted to the strengthening of the body, the elevation
of the moral faculties, and the cultivation of the intelligence ;
and, especially, to the imbuing of the mind with a broad and
clear view of the laws of that natural world with the compon-
ents of which the handicraftsman will have to deal. And,
the earlier the period of life at which the handicraftsman has to
enter into the actual practice of his craft, the more important
is it that he should devote the precious hours of preliminary
education to things of the mind, which have no direct and im-
mediate bearing on his branch of industry, though they lie at
the foundation of all the realities."

202 Thomas Henry Huxley

He compared his own handicraft as an anatomist
witli the handicrafts of artisans, and declared that the
kind of preliminary training he would choose for him-
self or for his pupils was precisely the training he
would provide for them. He did not wish that one
who proposed to be a biologist should learn dissection
during his school-days; that would come later, and,
in the meantime, broader and deeper foundations had
to be laid. These were the ordinary subjects of a
liberal education : physical training, drawing, and a
little music, French and German, the ordinary Eng-
lish subjects, and the elements of phj^sical science.
Against such costly schemes of education for the whole
population of a nation, many objections have been
urged. Of these, perhaps the chief is that the major-
ity of human beings even in the most civilised country
are not capable of profiting bj^ or taking an interest in,
or certainly of advancing far in, most subjects. Hux-
le}' met such objections in a spirit of the widest states-
manship. There were two reasons for making the
general education of all what he called a liberal educa-
tion. The first was that, even in a liberal education
such as he advocated, no subject was pursued beyond
the broad elementary stages, and that during the early
3'ears of life, while the framework and the character
were forming, it was of first-rate importance not to
stunt either by lack of material. The second great
principle was, that until any individual had had the
opportunity, it was impossible to say whether or no he
would profit much or little, and the gain to the whole
nation by not missing au)^ of tho.se who were born with
unusual natural capacity was more than worth the cost
of affording opportunities to all.

"The great mass of mankind have neither the liking, nor

Liberal Education 203

the aptitude, for either literary or scientific or artistic pursuits ;
nor, indeed, for excellence of any sort. Their ambition is to go
through life with moderate exertion and a fair share of ease,
doing common things in a common way. And a great blessing
and comfort it is that the majority of men are of this mind ;
for the majority of things to be done are common things, and
are quite well enough done when commonly done. The great
end of life is not knowledge but action. What men need is as
much knowledge as they can assimilate and organise into a
basis for action ; give them more and it may become injurious.
One knows people who are as heavy and stupid from undi-
gested learning as others are from over-fulness of meat and
drink. But a small percentage of the population is born with
that most excellent quality, a desire for excellence, or with
special aptitude of some sort or another. . . . Now, the
most important object of all educational schemes is to catch
these exceptional people, and turn them to account for the
good of society. No man can say where they will crop up ;
like their opposites, the fools and the knaves, they appear
sometimes in the palace, and sometimes in the hovel ; but the
great thing to be aimed at, I was almost going to say, the most
important end of all social arrangements, is to keep these
glorious sports of Nature from being either corrupted by luxury
or starved by poverty, and to put them into the position in
which they can do the work for which they are specially
fitted. . . . I weigh my words when I say that if the nation
could purchase a potential Watt or Davy or Faraday, at the
cost of a hundred thousand pounds down, he would be dirt
cheap at the money."

The beginning and end of the whole matter was that
a national system of education was above all things a
" capacity-catcher," designed to secure against the loss
of the incalculable advantages to be gained by ctilti-
vating the best genius born in the land.

v'''. .''.i. - ', 't*-^. CJ-'„ ■?.-,-■ o>" ■ <^ "..t.^

CHAPTER XII

CITIZEN, ORATOR, AND ESSAYIST

Huxley's Activity in Public Affairs — Official iu Scientific So-
cieties — Royal Commissions — Vivisection — Characteris-
tics of his Public Speaking — His Method of Exposition —
His Essays — Vocabulary — Phrase-Making — His Style
Essentially one of Ideas.

A GREAT body of fine work in science and litera-
ture has beeu'^rodticed bj^ persons who may be
described as typicall}^ academic. Such persons confine
their interest in life within the botindaries of their own
immediate purstiits ; they are absorbed so completely
by their avocations that the hurly-burl}- of the world
seems needlessly distracting and a little vulgar. No
doubt the thoughts of those who cry out most loudly
against disturbance by the intruding claims of the
world are, for the most part, hardly worth disturbing ;
the attitude to extrinsic things of those who are ab-
sorbed by their work is aped not infrequently by those
who are absorbed only in themselves. None the less it
is important to recognise that a genuine aversion from
affairs is characteristic of many fine original investi-
gators, and it is on stich persons that the idea of the
simple and childlike nature of philosophers, a simplicity
often reaching real incapacity for the affairs of life, is

204

Royal Commissions 205

based. There was no trace of this natural isolation in
the character of Huxley. He was not only a serious
student of science but a keen and zealous citizen,
eagerly conscious of the great social and political move-
ments around him, with the full sense that he was a
man living in society with other men and that there
was a business of life as well as a business of the labor-
atory. We have seen with what zeal he brought his
trained intelligence to bear not only on his own province
of scientific education, but on the wider problems of
general education, and yet the time he gave to these
was only a small part of that which he spared from ab-
stract science for affairs. In scientific institutions as
in others, there is always a considerable amount of
business, involving the management of men and the
management of money, and Huxley's readiness and
aptitude led to his being largely occupied with these.
For many years he was Dean of the Royal College of
Science at South Kensington, and for a considerable
time he served the Geological Society and the Royal
Society as secretary. In all these posts, Huxley dis-
played great capacity as a leader of men and as a man-
ager of affairs, and contributed largely to the successful
working of the institutions which he served.

In England, when troublesome questions press and
seem to call for new legislation, it frequently happens
that the collection and sifting of evidence preliminary
to legislation is a task for which the methods and rou-
tine of Parliament are unsuitable. The Queen, acting
through her responsible advisers, appoints a Royal
Commission, consisting of a small body of men, to
which is entrusted the preliminary task of collecting
and weighing evidence, or of making recommendations
on evidence already collected. To such honourable

2o6 Thomas Henry Muxlcy

posts Huxley was repeatedl}' called. He served on the
following Conunissioiis : i. Roj-al Commission on the
Operation of Acts relating to Trawling for Herrings on
the Coast of Scotland, 1862. 2. Royal Commission to
Knqnire into the Sea Fisheries of the United Kingdom,
1864-65. 3. Commission on the Royal College of
Science for Ireland, 1866. 4. Commission on Science
and Art Instruction in Ireland, 1868. 5. Royal Com-
mission on the Administration and Operation of the
Contagious Diseases Acts, 1870-71. 6. Royal Com-
mission on Scientific Instruction and the Advancement
of Science, 1870-75. 7. Royal Commission on the
Practice of Subjecting Live Animals to Experiments
for Scientific Purposes, 1876. 8. Royal Commission
to Enquire into the Universities of Scotland, 1876-78.
9. Royal Commission on the Medical Acts, 1881-82.
ID. Royal Commission on Trawl, Net, and Beam-Trawl
Fishing, 1884. This is a great record for any man,
especiall}^ for one in whose life work of this kind was
outside his habitual occupation. It was no doubt in
special recognition of the important services given his
country by such work, as well as in general recognition
of his distinction in science, that he was sworn a mem-
ber of Her Majesty's Privy Council, so attaining a
distinction more coveted than the peerage.

The voluminous reports of the Commissions shew
that Huxley, very far from being a silent member of
them, took a large part in framing the questions which
served to direct witnesses into useful lines, and that his
clear and orderly habit of thought proved as useful in
the elucidation of these subjects as they were in matters
of scientific research. For the most part, the problems
brought before the Commissions have lost their interest
for readers of later years, but there are matters still

Vivisection 207

unsettled on which the opinions of Huxley as expressed
then remain useful. The Commission of 1876, for in-
stance, dealt with vivisection, a matter on which the
conscience of the ordinary man is not yet at rest. Al-
though Huxley was intenselj^ interested in the problems
of physiology, and although at one time he hoped
to devote his life to them, fortune directed otherwise,
and the investigations for which he is famed did not
in any way involve the kind of experiments known as
vivisection. The greater part of his work was upon
the remains of creatures dead for thousands of years or
upon the lifeless skeletons of modern forms. On the
other hand, he was keenly interested in the progress of
physiological science, he had personal acquaintance
wutli most of the distinguished workers in physiology
of his time at home and abroad, and from this know-
ledge of their character and aspirations he was well
able to judge of the wholesale and reckless accusations
brought against them. He was a man full of the finest
humanity, with an unusual devotion to animals as pets,
and with knowledge of the degrees of pain involved in
experimenting on living creatures. He insisted strongly
on the necessity of limiting or abolishing pain, where-
ever it was possible ; he agreed that any experiments
which involved pain should not be permitted for the
purpose of demonstrating known elementary facts.
But, from his knowledge of the incalculable benefits
which had been gained from experimental research,
and from his confidence in those who conducted it, he
declined to give support to the misguided fanatics who
desired to make such experimental research a penal
offence, even when conducted by the most skilled ex-
perts for the highest purposes.

Huxley contributed his share to the great questions

2o8 Thomas Henry Huxley

which agitated the public not only by service on Com-
missions, but by delivering a large number of public
addresses and writing a large number of essays on
topics of special interest. Much of his work on
scientific, educational, and general subjects took its
first shape in the form of addresses given to some pub-
lic audience. University audiences in England, Scot-
land, and America were familiar to him, and from
time to time he addressed large gatherings of a mixed
character. But probably his favourite audience was
composed of working men, and he had the greatest
respect for the intelligence and sympathy of hearers
who like himself passed the greater portion of their
time in hard work. Professor Howes, his pupil, friend,
and successor, writes of him :

" He gave workmeu of his best. The substance of 3fa!t^s
Place in Nature, one of the most successful and popular of
his writings, and of his Crayfish, perhaps the most perfect
zoological treatise ever published, was first communicated to
them. In oue of the last communications I had with him, I
asked his views as to the desirability of discontinuing the
workmen's lectures at Jermyu Street, since the development
of workmen's colleges and institutes was regarded by some as
rendering their continuance unnecessary. He replied, almost
with indignation, 'With our central situation and resources we
ought to be in a position to give the workmen that which they
cannot get elsewhere,' adding that he would deeply deplore
any such discontinuance."

Huxley had no natural facility for speech. He tells
us that at first he disliked it, and that he had a firm
conviction that he would break down every time he
opened his mouth. The only two possible fatilts of a
public speaker which he believed himself to be with-
out, were "talking at random and indulging in
rhetoric." With practice, he lost this earlier hesit-

Public Speaking 209

ancy, and before long became known as one of the
finest speakers of his time. Certain natural gifts aided
him ; his well-set figure and strong features, of which
the piercing eyes and firm, trap-like mouth were the
most striking, riveted attention, while his voice had a
wide range and was beautifully modulated. But it was
above all things the matter and not the manner of his
speech that commanded success. He cared Httle or no-
thing for the impression he might make — everything
for the ideas which he wished to conve3^ He was
concerned only to set forth these ideas in their clear
and logical order, convinced in his own mind that,
were the facts as he knew them placed before the
minds of his hearers, only one possible result could
follow. The facts had convinced him : they must
equally convince any honest and intelligent person
placed in possession of them. He had not the smallest
intention of overbearing by authority or of swaying
by skilfully aroused emotion. Such weapons of the
orator seemed to him dishonest in the speaker and
most perilous to the audience. For him, speaking on
any subject was merely a branch of scientific expos-
ition ; when emotion was to be roused or enthusiasm
to be kindled the inspiration was to come from the
facts and not from the orator. The arts he allowed
himself were those common to all forms of exposition ;
he would explain a novel set of ideas by compar-
ison with simpler ideas obvious to all his listeners ;
and he sought to arrest attention or to drive home a
conclusion by some brilliant phrase that bit into the
memory. These two arts, the art of the phrase-
maker and the art of explaining by vivacious and
simple comparison, he brought to a high perfection.

The fundamental method of his exposition was simply
14

2IO Thomas Henry Huxley

the method of comparative anatomy, the result of a
habit of thinking which makes it impossible to have
any set of ideas brought into the mind without an
immediate, almost unconscious, overhauling of the
memory for atiy other ideas at all congruous. In a
strict scientific exposition Huxley would choose from
the multitude of possible comparisons that most simple
and most intelligible to his audience ; when in a lighter
vein, he gave play to a natural humour in his choice.
Instances of his method of exposition by comparison
abound in his published addresses. I^et us take one
or two. In the course of an address to a large mixed
audience so early in his public career as 1854, i^ mak-
ing plain to them the proposition, somewhat novel for
those days, that the natural history sciences had an
educational value, he explained that the faculties em-
ployed in that subject were simply those of the com-
mon sense of every-day life.

" The vast results obtained by Science are won by no mysti-
cal faculties, by no mental processes other than those which
are practised by every one of us, in the humblest and meanest
affairs of life. A detective policeman discovers a burglar from
the marks made by his shoe, by a mental process identical with
that by which Cuvier restored the extinct animals of Mont-
tnartre from fragments of their bones. Nor does that process
of induction and deduction by which a lady, finding a stain of
a peculiar kind on her dress, concludes that somebody has
upset the inkstand thereon, differ in any way, in kind, from
that by which Adams and Leverrier discovered a new planet."

In one of his addresses to working men on Man' s
Place in Nature he shewed that from time to time in
the history of the world average persons of the hu-
man race have accepted some kind of answer to the
insoluble riddles of existence, but that from time to

Method of Exposition 211

time the race has outgrown the current answers, ceas-
ing to take comfort from them.

"In a well-worn metaphor a parallel is drawn between the
life of man and the metamorphosis of a caterpillar into a but-
terfly ; but the comparison may be more just as well as more
novel, if for its former term we take the mental progress of the
race. History shews that the human mind, fed by constant
accessions of knowledge, periodically grows too large for its
theoretical coverings, and bursts them asunder to appear in
new habiliments, as the feeding and growing grub, at intervals,
casts its too narrow skin and assumes another, itself but temp-
orary. Truly, the imago state of man seems to be terribly
distant, but every moult is a step gained, and of such there
have been many."

As another instance, the following from his address on
a " I^iberal Education " may be taken. He had been
discussing the intellectual advantage to be derived
from classical studies, and had been comparing, to the
disadvantage of the latter, the intellectual discipline
which might be got from a study of fossils with the
discipline claimed by the ordinary experts upon edu-
cation to be the restilts of classical training. He
wished to anticipate the obvious objection to his
argument : that the stibject-matter of palaeontology
had no direct bearing on human interests and emo-
tions, while the classical authors were rich in the
finest humanity.

"But it will be said that I forget the beauty "and the human
interest, which appertain to classical studies. To this I reply
that it is only a very strong man who can appreciate the
charms of landscape as he is toiling up a steep hill, along a bad
road. What with short-windedness, stones, ruts, and a pervad-
ing sense of the wisdom of rest and be thankful, most of us
have little enough sense of the beautiful under these circum-
stances. The ordinary schoolboy is precisely in this case. He

212 Thomas Henry Huxley

finds Parnassus uncommonly steep, and there is no chance of
his having much time or inclination to look about him till he
gets to the top. And nine times out of ten he does not get to
the top."

The last example we shall take cotiies from a speech
made after dinner at a much later period of his life.
The occasion was a complimentary dinner to the editor
of the English scientific periodical Nature, which had
been for long the leading semi-popular journal of
English science. Huxley, in proposing the health of
the editor, declared that he did not quite know how
to say what he wanted to say, but that he would ex-
plain by a story.

"A poor woman," he said, "was brought into one of our
hospitals in a shockingly battered condition. When her
wounds had been cleaned and sewn, and when the care of the
surgeons had restored her to comparative comfort, someone
said to her, ' I am afraid your husband has been knocking you
about.' ' What ! ' she said, ' my Jim bash me ? no it worn't by
him ; he 's always been more like a friend to me than a hus-
band.' That," went on Huxley, "is what I wish to say
about our guest of to-night. In all our intercourse with him
he has been more like a friend to us than an editor."

7 It is impossible to make a real distinction between
the essays and the addresses of Huxley. Many of
the most important of his addresses, as for instance
his Romanes lecture on " Evolution and Ethics," were
written and printed before he delivered them ; most of
them were carefully prepared, and revised and printed
after delivery. It is therefore not remarkable to
find a close resemblance in matter and manner be-
tween what was originally spoken and what was
published without a viv6, voce delivery. Everything
that may be said of the one set applies with an equal

Huxley's Vocabulary 213

fitness to the other set. There are many who assert
with confidence that Huxley is one of the great mas-
ters of EngHsh, and although an examination of this
opinion involves discussion of the elusive quality
termed ' ' style, " it is necessary to attempt it.

In that totality which consists of an essay or of a
printed address, and of which we are, most of us,
ready to discuss the style, there are at least three
separable elements, each contributing after its kind to
the efiect on our minds. When the general effect is
to throw us into a state of pleasure, it is our habit to
qualify the st}4e with an adjective of praise, selecting
the adjective according to the degree of restraint or of
enthusiasm with which we are accustomed to express
our emotions ; when the general effect is to throw us
into a condition of boredom or of distaste, we make a
corresponding choice of appropriate adjectives. When
we wish to be specially critical we pass a little way
beyond an empirical judgment by pleasure or annoy-
ance and take into account the degree of harmony
between matter and manner. In such a frame of mind
we discount the pleasure obtained from verbal quips,
if these occur in a grave exposition, or that received
from solemn and stately harmonies of language if these
be employed on insignificant trifles. In a condition of
unusual critical exaltation we may even admit an
excellence of language and phrasing though these have
as their contents ideas which we dislike, or press to-
wards conclusions from which we dissent. But if we
desire to make an exact appreciation of literary style,
it is requisite to examine separately the three elements
which contribute to the effect produced on us by any
written work. These three elements are the words or
raw materials employed, the building of words into

2 14 Thomas Henry Huxley

sentences and of sentences into paragraphs, which may
be designated as the architectural work, and, finally,
the ideas conveyed, that is to say, the actual object of
the writing.

Huxley was a wide and omnivorous reader, and so
had an unusually large fund of words at his disposal.
His writings abound with quotations and allusions
taken from the best English authors, and he had a
profound and practical belief in the advantage to be
gained from the reading of English. " If a man," he
wrote, "cannot get literary culture out of his Bible,
and Chaucer, and Shakespeare, and Milton, and
Hobbes, and Bishop Berkeley, to mention only a few
of our illustrious writers— I say, if he cannot get it out
of these writers, he cannot get it out of anything."
He had at least a fair knowledge of Greek in the
original, and a very wide acquaintance with Greek
phrasing and Greek ideas derived from a study of
Greek authors in English versions. He had an unusual
knowledge of Latin, both of the classical writers and
of the early Church fathers and mediaeval writers on
science and metaphysics. French and German, the
two foreign languages which are a necessary part of
the mental equipment of an English-speaking man of
science, were familiar to him. Finally, he had of neces-
sity the wide and varied vocabulary of the natural and
technical sciences at his disposal. From these varied
sources, Huxley had a fund of words, a store of the
raw material for expressing ideas, very much greater
and more varied than that in the possession of most
writers. You will find in his writings abundant and
omnipresent evidence of the enormous wealth of verbal
material ready for the ideas he wished to set forth : a
Greek phrase, a German phrase, a Latin or French

Style 2 1 5

phrase, or a group of words borrowed from one of our
own great writers always seemed to await his wish.
General Booth's scheme for elevating the masses by-
cymbals and dogma was ' ' corybantic Christianity ' ' ;
to explain what he thought was the Catholic attitude
to the doctrine of evolution, he said it would have
been called daimiabilis by Father Suarez, and that he
would have meant " not that it was to be damned, but
that it was an active principle capable of damning."
Huxley was like a builder who did not limit himself
while he was constructing a house to the ordinary
materials from the most convenient local quarry, but
who collected endlessly from all the quarries and brick-
fields of the world, and brought to his heaps curiously
wrought stones taken from a thousand old buildings.
The swift choice from such a varied material gave an
ease and appearance of natural growth to his work ;
it produced many surprising and delightful combina-
tions, and it never sacrificed convenience of expression
to exigencies of the materials for expression. On the
other hand, Huxley lacked the sedulous concern for
words themselves as things valuable and delightful ;
the delfl)^t of the craftsman in his tools ; the dainty
and respectful tribute paid to the words themselves ;
in fine, he took little pleasure in words themselves and
used them as counters rather than as coins. Careful
reflection and examination will make it plain that the
pleasure to be got from Huxley's style is not due in
any large measure to his choice and handling of words.
There is no evidence that he deliberately and fastidi-
ously preferred one word to another, that he took de-
light in the savour of individual words, in the placing
of plain words in a context to make them sparkle, in
the avoidance of some, in the deliberate preference of

2i6 Thomas Henry Huxley

other words, — in fact, in all the conscious tricks and
graces that distinguish the lover of words from their
mere user.

A close examination discovers a similar absence
from Huxlej'-'s work of the second contributory to the
total effect produced by written words. Anything
that may be said about absence of artistry in the use
of words, may be said as to absence of artistry in build-
ing of the words into sentences, of the sentences into
paragraphs and pages. In the first place, actual in-
felicities of sentence-building are frequent. Clause is
piled on clause, qualifying phrases are interpolated,
the eas}^ devices of dashes and repetitions are employed
wherever convenience suggests them. It is striking
to find how infrequent is the occurrence of passages
marked in any wa}^ by sonorous rhythm or b)'- the
charm of a measured proportion. The purple passages
themselves, those which linger in the memory and to
which the reader turns back, linger by their sense and
uot by their sound. For indeed the truth of the
matter is that Huxley's style was a style of ideas and \j
not of words and sentences. The more closely you
analyse his pages the more certainly you find that the
secret of the effect produced on you lies in the gradual
development of the precise and logical ideas he wished
to convey, in the brilliant accumulation of argument
upon argument, in the logical subordination of details
to the whole, in fact, in the arts of the convinced,
positive, and logical thinker, who knew exactly what
he meant you to know and who set about telling you
it with the least possible concern for the words he
used or for the sentences into which he formed his
w^ords. The ideas and their ordering are the root and
the branches, the beginning and the end of his style.

Style 217

To put it in another way : it would be extremely easy
to translate any of Huxley's writings into French or
German, and they would lose extremely little of the
personal flavour of their author. The present writer
has just been reading French translations of Huxley's
Physiography and Crayfish, made at different times
by different translators. At first reading it seems
almost miraculous how identically the effect produced
by the original is reproduced by the French rendering,
but the secret is really no secret at all. Huxle}^ pro-
duced his effects by the ordering of his ideas and not
by the ordering of his words. From the technical
point of view of literary craftsmanship, he cannot be
assigned a high place ; he is one of our great English
writers, but he is not a great writer of English.

CHAPTER XIII

THE OPPONENT OF MATERIAIyISM

Science and Metaphysics — Berkeley, Hume, and Hobbes — Ex-
istence of Matter and Mind — Descartes's Contribution —
Materialism and Idealism — Criticism of Materialism —
Berkeley's Idealism — Criticism of Idealism — Empirical
Idealism — Materialism as opposed to Supernaturalism —
Mind and Brain — Origin of Life — Teleology, Chance, and
the Argument from Design.

THE prosecution of independent thinking in any
branch of knowledge leads to the ultimate
problems of philosophy. The mathematician cannot
ponder over the meaning of his figures, the chemist
that of his reactions, the biologist that of his tissues
and cells, the psychologist that of sensations and con-
ceptions, without being tempted from the comparatively
secure ground of observations and the arrangement of
observations into the perilous regions of metaphysics.
Most scientific men return quickly, repelled and per-
haps a little scared bj^ the baffling confusion of that
windy region of thought where no rules of logic seem
incontrovertible, no conclusions tenable, and no dis-
cussions profitable. Huxley, however, not only en-
tered into metaphysical questions with enthusiasm,
but gave a great deal of time to the study of some of
the great metaphysical writers. His views are to be

218

Matter and Mind 219

found scattered through very many of his ordinary
scientific writings, but are specially set forth in a
volume on Hiwie, which he wrote for Mr, John
Motley's series, English Men of Letters, and in essays
on Berkeley and on Descartes, all of which are repub-
lished in the Collected Essays. He contrived to pre-
serve, in the most abstrusely philosophical of these
writings, a simplicity and clarity which, although they
have not commended him to professional metaphysi-
cians, make his attitude to the problems of meta-
physics extremely intelligible. The greatest barrier
and cause of confusion to the novice in metaphysics
is that the writings of most of the great authorities are
overburdened by their great knowledge of the historj'
of philosophy. Huxley, in a characteristic piece of
" parting advice " in the preface to his work on Hume
attacked this confusion between the history of a subject
and the subject itself

"If it is your desire," he wrote, "to discourse fluently and
learnedly about philosophical questions, begin with the lon-
ians and work steadily through to the latest new speculative
treatise. If you have a good memory and a fair knowledge of
Greek, Latin, French, and German, three or four years spent
in this way should enable you to attain your object. If, on the
contrary, you are animated by the much rarer desire for real
knowledge ; if you want to get a clear conception of the deep-
est problems set before the intellect of man, there is no need,
so far as I can see, for you to go beyond the limits of the Eng-
lish tongue. Indeed, if you are pressed for time, three English
authors will suffice, namely, Berkeley, Hume, and Hobbes."

The first and perhaps the greatest problem in meta-
physics can be put very shortly. What is the reality
behind the apparent universe of matter and mind we
see around us ? Or, rather, what do we know of that
reality ? To the uninitiated in philosophical thinking

2 20 Thomas Henry Huxley

it seems sufficiently plain that there are two entities,
bod)' and soul in man, matter and mind in the whole
universe ; and various types of intelligent dogmatists,
ranging from the sturdy if somewhat stupid shrewd-
ness of Dr. Johnson to the agile casuistry of Catholic
metaphysicians, have supported this simple verdict of
" common sense. " Trouble begins, however, with
any attempt to analyse the relations between what we
call " matter " and what we call " mind." It appears,
for instance, that what we call matter we only know
in terms of mind. In an essay on Descartes' s Discourse
oil Method, Huxley explains this by simple examples.

" I take up a marble and I find it to be a red, round, hard,
siugle body. We call the redness, the roundness, the hardness
and the singleness, 'qualities' of the marble; and it sounds,
at first, the height of absurdity to say that all these qualities
are modes of our own consciousness, which cannot even be con-
ceived to exist in the marble. But consider the redness, to be-
gin with. How does the sensation of redness arise? The waves
of a certain very attenuated matter, the particles of which are
vibrating with vast rapidity, but with very different velocities,
strike upon the marble, and those which vibrate with one par-
ticular velocity are thrown off from its surface in all directions.
The optical apparatus of the ej'e gathers some of these together,
and gives them such a course that they impinge upon the sur-
face of the retina, which is a singularly delicate apparatus con-
nected with the terminations of the fibres of the optic nerve.
The impulses of the attenuated matter, or ether, affect this
apparatus and the fibres of the optic nerve in a certain way ;
and the change in the fibres of the optic nerve produces yet
other changes in the brain ; and these, in some fashion un-
known to us, give rise to the feeling, or consciousness, of red-
ness. If the marble could remain unchanged, and either the
vibrations of the ether, or the nature of the retina, could be
altered, the marble would seem not red, but some other colour.
There are many people who are what are called colour-blind,
being unable to distinguish one colour from another. Such an

Criticism of Materialism 221

one might declare our marble to be greeu ; and he would be

quite as right iu saying that it is green as we are in declaring

it to be red. But then, as the marble itself cannot be both J.'^ ^s^ ^-^ "^

green and red, at the same time, this shews that the quality '^ '^v^'v -

redness must be in our consciousness and not in the marble."

In similar fashion lie shewed that the hardness, round-
ness, and even the singleness of the marble were, so
far as we know, states of our consciousness and not in
the marble. The argtiment is capable of application to
all that we call matter, and it thus appears, on analysis,
that what we know of matter is simply a series of states
of otir consciousness, or mind. In similar fashion, it
ttirns out that what we call mind is, so far as practical
experience goes, always associated with and dependent
on what we call matter. We have no direct knowledge
of thinking without a brain, or of consciousness with-
out a body. Alterations and changes in matter, as for
instance in the tissues and nutrition of the body, are, so
far as our experience goes, inseparably associated with
mental operations. In the animal kingdom we see the
development of the mind creeping slowly after the de-
velopment of the material nervous system, until, in
man, the mo.st complex mind and most complex con-
sciousness of which we have knowledge accompany
the most complex body and brain.

Two great rival solutions to this fundamental pro-
blem are Materialism and Idealism. Materialism sup-
po.ses that what we call matter is the real substance of
the universe, and that mind is merely one of the forms
of its activity. The advance of physical science has
done much to make the materialistic hypothesis more
plausible. When matter was believed to be inert, the
mere vehicle or theatre of forces, materialism remained
a singularly crude and unsatisfying position. But now

22 2 Thomas Henry Huxley

that science has shewn all that we call matter — the
most solid metals and the most attenuated vapours,
the most stable and resisting inorganic bodies, and the
unstable tissues of living bodies — to be alike in restless,
orderly motion, to be, in fact, motion itself and not the
thing moved, to be changeable but indestructible, pass-
ing through phases but eternal, there seems less diffi-
cult)' in assuming it to be the ultimate reality, and
mind and consciousness to be its most highly special-
ised qualities. Huxley, while stating this view plainly
enough, refused to accept it as a legitimate conclusion
from the facts.

"For anything that maybe proved to the contrary, there
may be a real something which is the cause of all our impres-
sions ; that sensations, though not likenesses, are symbols of
that something ; and that the part of that something, which
we call the nervous system, is an apparatus for supplying us
with a sort of algebra of fact, based on these symbols. A brain
may be the machinery by which the material universe becomes
conscious of itself. But it is important to notice that, even if
this conception of the universe and of the relation of con-
sciousness to its other components should be true, we should,
nevertheless, be still bound by the limits of thought, still un-
able to refute the arguments of pure idealism. The more
completely the materialistic position is admitted, the easier it is
to show that the idealistic position is unassailable, if the idealist
confines himself within the limits of positive knowledge."

However we attempt to form what philosophers call
"ejects," to imagine that what is reall}- in our con-
sciousness is really the world outside ourselves, these
ejects remain mere phenomena of our minds. Matter
itself and its changes may, in the long run, be but
modes of motion, but "our knowledge of motion is
nothing but that of a change in the place and order

Berkeley's Idealism 223

of our sensations ; just as our knowledge of matter is
restricted to those feelings of which we assume it to be
the cause." Huxley's exact position in regard to ma-
terialism is most plain in his expositions of the writings
of Berkeley, with whom began in England the greatest
movement towards an idealistic philosophy.

"Berkeley faced the problem boldly. He said to the ma-
terialists : ' You tell me that all the pheuomena of uature are
resolvable into matter and its affections. I assent to your
statement, and now I put to you the further question, What
is matter? lu answering this question you shall be bound by
your own conditions ; and I demand, in the terms of the Car-
tesian axiom, that you in turn give your assent only to such
conclusions as are perfectly clear and obvious.' "

Huxley then goes on to state the general lines of the
arguments by which Berkeley arrived at the apparently
paradoxical conclusion "that all the choir of heaven
and furniture of the earth — in a word, all those bodies
which compose the mighty frame of the world," have
an existence only so far as they are in a perceiving
mind. And he proceeds at length to explain the im-
mense importance of the truths underlying Berkeley's
position.

" The key to all philosophy lies in the clear apprehension of
Berkeley's problem — which is neither more nor less than one
of the shapes of the greatest of all questions, ' What are the
limits of our faculties ? ' And it is worth any amount of trouble
to comprehend the exact nature of the argument by which
Berkeley arrived at his results, and to know by one's own
knowledge the great truth which he discovered — that the hon-
est and rigorous following up of the argument which leads us
to materialism inevitably carries us beyond it."

Huxley, however, while he opposed a materialistic
explanation of the universe with the strength of ex-

2 24 Thomas Henry Huxley

position and acute reasoning at his disposal, did not
pass directly into the other camp and become a pure
idealist.

"Granting the premisses," be wrote, "I do not see any
escape from Berkeley's conclusion, that the substance of mat-
ter is a metaphysical unknown quantity, of the existence of
which there is no proof. What Berkeley does not seem to have
so clearly perceived is that the non-existence of a substance of
mind is equally arguable ; and that the result of the impartial
application of his reasonings is the reduction of the all to co-
existences and sequences of phenomena, beneath and beyond
which there is nothing coguoscible."

Hume had written : ' ' What we call a mind is no-
thing but a heap or collection of different perceptions,
united together by certain relations, and supposed,
though falsel}', to be endowed with a perfect simplicit)'
and identity." Here was mind rejected for the same
negative reasons as matter, and Huxley was as ready
to point out that while we can know nothing of the

"substance of the thinking thing, we go beyond legitimate
reasoning if we therefore deny its existence." . . . "Hume
may be right or wrong, but the most he or anyone else can
prove in favour of his conclusions is, that we know nothing
more of the mind than that it is' a series of perceptions.
Whether there is something in the mind that lies beyond the
reach of observation, or whether perceptions themselves are
the products of something which can be observed and which
is not mind, are questions which can in no wise be settled
by direct observation."

In another passage he writes :

" To sum up. If the materialist affirms that the universe
and all its phenomena are resolvable into matter and motion,
Berkeley replies. True ; but what you call matter and motion
are known to us only as forms of consciousness ; their being
is to be conceived or known ; and the existence of a state of

Empirical Idealism 225

consciousness, apart from a thinking mind, is a contradiction
in terms. I conceive that this reasoning is irrefragable. And
therefore, if I were obliged to choose between absolute ma-
terialism and absolute idealism, I should feel compelled to
accept the latter alternative. Indeed, upon this point Locke
does, practically, go as far in the direction of idealism as
Berkeley, when he admits that the 'simple ideas which we
receive from sensation and reflection are the boundaries of our
thoughts, beyond which the mind, whatever efforts it would
make, is not able to advance one jot.' "

Ivocke went further, and Huxley agreed with him.
He declared that the mind cannot " make any dis-
coveries when it would pry into the nature and hidden
cause of these ideas." We must, in fact, definitely
reject what we know as matter as the absolute reality
of the universe, for it becomes verj^ plain that what we
call matter we know merely as affections of our own
consciousness. In a sense, then, so far as it is opposed
to materialism, idealism, according to Huxlej', must
be the philosophical position of a scientific man. But
the idealism is not the absolute idealism of Berkeley,
as we have no logical right to den}- or to affirm the
existence of absolute matter or of absolute mind. The
real truth of the philosophy of science lies in a separa-
tion between metaphysical theor}' and actual ptirstiits.
In ultimate philosophical tlieor\' it is impossible to rest
content with a plain natural conception of the universe.
When any conception of matter, or of its aiFections, is
pushed as far as analysis can take us, what we know
resolves itself into affections of mind, into what with-
out metaphysical finesse may be called ideas. But this
empirical idealism mtist be taken positively as being
merely the limits of our knowledge, and it must carry
with it neither an iindtie exaltation of mind nor an

undue depreciation of matter.
15

2 26 Thomas Henry Huxley

"The Platonic philosophy is probably the grandest exam-
ple of the unscientific use of the imagination extant ; and it
would be hard to estimate the amount of detriment to clear
thinking effected, directly and indirectly, by the theory of
ideas, on the one hand, and by the unfortunate doctrine of
the baseness of matter, on the other."

Materialism was dismissed by Huxley as being an
inadequate philosophical explanation of the universe,
and as being based on a logical delusion. There re-
mains, however, a practical application of the word in
which the conceptions it involves are almost an inevit-
able part of science, and which was strenuously urged
by Huxley. In the earlier days of the world and of
.science almost all the phenomena of nature were re-
garded as random or wilful displays of living intelli-
gence. The earth itself and the sun, the moon, and
the stars were endowed with life ; legions of lULseen
intelligences ruled the operations of nature, and al-
though these might be bribed or threatened, pleased or
made angry, their actions were regarded as beyond
prediction or control. The procession of the seasons,
the routine of day and night, the placid appea.sement
of the rains, the devastating roar of storms, the shin-
ing of the rainbow, the bubbling of springs, the terrors
of famine and pestilence ; all these — the varying environ-
ment which makes or mars human life — were regarded
as inevitable and capricious. The whole progress of
phj'sical .science has been attended with a gradual
elimination of these supernatural agencies and with a
continual replacement of them by conceptions of phys-
ical sequence.

" In singular contrast with natural knowledge, the acquaint-
ance of mankind with the supernatural appears the more ex-
act, and the influence of supernatural doctrine on conduct the

Practical Materialism 227

greater, the further we go back in time and the lower the stage
of civilisatioa submitted to investigation. Historically, indeed,
there would seem to be an inverse relation between supernatural
and natural knowledge. As the latter has widened, gained in
precision and trustworthiness, so has the former shrunk, grown
vague and questionable ; as the one has more and more filled
the sphere of action, so has the other retreated into the region
of meditation, or vanished behind the screen of mere verbal
recognition. Whether this difference of the fortunes of Natural-
ism and Supernaturalism is an indication of the progress, or of
the regress of humanity, of a fall from or an advance towards
the higher life, is a matter of opinion. The point to which I
wish to direct attention is that the diflference exists and is mak-
ing itself felt. Men are growiug seriously alive to the fact that
the historical evolution of humanity, which is generally, and I
venture to think, not unreasonably, regarded as progress, has
been and is being accompanied by a co-ordinate elimination of
the supernatural from its originally large occupation of men's
thought."

Every stage in this long process, every new attempt
to place physical phenomena in a chain of direct caus-
ation has been denounced as dangerous and degrading
materialism, and in this sense Huxley was not only
an adherent but one of the foremost champions of ma-
terialism. As everyone knows, some of the greatest
advances in this process of co-ordinating physical
phenomena were made during Huxley's life ; and his
vigorous onslaughts on those who tried to thwart all
attempts at material explanations in favour of unknown
agencies made him specially open to abusive criticism.
The battle was almost invariably between those who
had not special knowledge and those in possession of
it, and it occurred in practically the whole field of
science, but particularly in the biological sciences. A
single example will serve to shew what is meant by
materialism in this sense and the attitude of Huxley to

2 28 Thomas Henry Huxley

it. The stud}- of the human mind naturally has at-
tracted the attention of thinkers almost since the be-
ginning of philosophy, but until this century, with a
few crude exceptions, it has been conducted entirely
apart from anatomy and physiology. Advances in
these physical sciences, however, have changed that,
and the modern psychologist has to begin by being a
physiologist and anatomist.

" Surely no oue who is cognisant of the facts of the case,
nowadays, doubts that the roots of psychology lie in the phys-
iology of the nervous system. What we call the operations of
the mind are the functions of the brain, and the materials of
consciousness are products of cerebral activity. Cabanis may
have made use of crude and misleading phraseology when
he said that the brain secretes thought as the liver secretes
bile ; but the conception which that much-abused phrase em-
bodies is, nevertheless, far more consistent with fact than the
popular notion that the mind is a metaphysical entity seated in
the head, but as independent of the brain as a telegraph operator
is of his instrument. It is hardly necessary to point out that
the doctrine just laid down is what is commonly called materi-
alism. I am not sure that the adjective ' crass,' which appears
to have a special charm for rhetorical sciolists, would not be
applied to it. But it is, nevertheless, true that the doctrine
contains nothing inconsistent with the purest idealism,"

The whole doctrine of evolution is similarly a materi-
alistic account of natural phenomena, in the popular
and not the philosophical meaning of the term. But
even within this popular meaning, it is extremely neces-
sary to have an exact conception of the limits within
which Huxley was materialistic. Take for instance
the question of the origin of life. It would be one of the
greatest achievements of physical science could it shew
that life was not inco-ordinate with non-living physical
phenomena, but was a special case of them. Huxley
knew that this advance had not yet been made.

Origin of Life 229

" It may be that, by-and-by, philosophers will discover some
higher laws of which the facts of life are particular cases — very
possibly they will find out some bond between physico-chemi-
cal phenomena on the one hand, and vital phenomena on the
other. At present, however, we assuredly know of none ; and I
think we shall exercise a wise humility in confessing that, for
us at least, this successive assumption of different states (exter-
nal conditions remaining the same) — this spontaneity of action
— if I may use a term which implies more than I would be
answerable for— which constitutes so vast and plain a practical
distinction between living bodies and those which do not live,
is an ultimate fact ; indicating as such, the existence of a broad
line of demarcation between the subject matter of biological
and of all other science."

In another passage he wrote :

"Looking back through the prodigious vista of the past I
find no record of the commencement of life, and therefore I am
devoid of any means of forming a definite conclusion as to the
conditions of its appearance. Belief, in the scientific sense of
the word, is a serious matter, and needs strong foundations.
To say, therefore, in the admitted absence of evidence, that I
have any belief as to the mode in which the existing forms of
life have originated, would be using words in a wrong sense.
But expectation is permissible where belief is not ; and if it
were given me to look beyond the abyss of geologically re-
corded time to the still more remote period when the earth was
passing through physical and chemical conditions which it can
no more see again than a man can recall his infancy, I should
expect to be a witness of the evolution of living protoplasm
from non-living matter. I should expect to see it appear under
forms of great simplicity, endowed, like existing fungi, with
the power of determining the formation of new protoplasm
from such matters as ammonium carbonates, oxalates, and tar-
trates, alkaline and earthy phosphates, and water, without the
aid of light. That is the expectation to which analogical rea-
soning leads me, but I beg you once more to recollect that I
have no right to call my opinion anything but an act of
philosophical faith."

230 Thomas Henry Huxley

Since these words were written the reasons for Huxley's
" philosophic faith" have been strengthened by later
discoveries, and perhaps a majority of biologists would
take the view that except for practical purposes there
is no sound reason for placing living and inorganic
aggregations of matter in totally different categories.
But even if the main outline of the theory of evolution
were proved beyond the possibility of doubt, if we
could trace existing plants and animals backwards with
the accuracy of a genealogist and find that they had
been developed, under purely physical " laws " from a
few simple forms, and if we could understand exactly
how these few simple forms of living matter took origin
from non-living matter, we would not, if we followed
Huxley, be able to rest in a purely materialistic posi-
tion. As he, in different words, repeatedly said :

" It is very desirable to remember that evolution is not an
explanation of the cosmos, but merely a generalised statement
of the method and results of that process. And, further, that,
if there is any proof that the cosmic process was set going by
any agent, then that agent will be the creator of it and of all
its products, although supernatural intervention may remain
strictly excluded from its further course."

The doctrine of evolution was, for him, no attempt
to reinstate the ' ' old pagan goddess, Chance. ' ' Darwin
had again and again explained, and Huxlej'' again
and again had called attention to the explanation, that
when words like " chance " and " spontaneous " were
used, no more was intended to be implied than an ig-
norance of the causes. In the true sense of the word
" chance " did not exist for Huxley and Darwin. So
far as all scientific and common experience goes, every
event is connected with foregoing events in an orderly
and inevitable chain of sequences, — a chain that could

Chance 231

have been predicted or predetermined by any sufl5cient
intelligence. Moreover, Huxley did not believe that
Darwin's views, rightly interpreted, " abolished teleo-
logy and eviscerated the argument from design."
They only abolished that crude expression of teleology
which supposed all structures among animals and
plants to have been created in their present forms for
their present purposes. Under the stimulus given to
biology by the doctrine of evolution that science has
progressed far beyond conceptions so rudely mechani-
cal. We know that behind each existing structure
there is a long history of change ; of change not only
in form and appearance, but also in function. In the
development of living organisms to-day, as they grow
up into tree or animal from seed or egg, we can trace
the record of these changes of form ; in some cases
we can follow the actual change of function. But in a
wider sense there is no incongruity between evolution
and teleology.

" There is a wider teleology," Huxley wrote, " which is not
touched by the doctrine of evolution, but is actually based on
the fundamental proposition of evolution. This proposition is
that the whole world, living and not living, is the result of the
mutual interaction, according to definite laws, of the forces
possessed by the molecules of which the primitive nebulosity
of the universe was composed. That acute champion of teleo-
logy, Paley, saw no difiSculty in admitting that the ' produc-
tion of things ' may be the result of mechanical dispositions
fixed beforehand by intelligent appointment and kept in action
by a power at the centre."

CHAPTER XIV

FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

Authority aud Knowledge in Science — The Duty of Doubt —
Authority and Individual Judgment in Religion — The
Protestant Position — Sir Charles Lyell and the Deluge —
Infallibility — The Church and Science — Morality and
Dogma — Civil aud Religious Diberty — Agnosticism and
Clericalism — Meaning of Agnosticism — 'Knowledge and
Evidence — The Method of Agnosticism.

IN the practice of modern law-courts, a witness rarely
is allowed to offer as evidence any statement for
which he himself is not the direct authority. What he
himself saw or heard or did with regard to the matter
at issue — these, and not what others told him thej^ had
seen or heard or done, are the limits within which he is
allowed to be a competent witness. As a matter of
fact, in the business of life we have to act differently.
A large proportion of our opinions, beliefs, and reasons
for conduct must come to us on the authorit}^ of others.
We have no direct experience of the past ; of the pre-
sent we can see little and onlj- the little immediately
surrounding us. In a multitude of affairs we have to
act on authority, to accept from books or from persons
what we have not ourselves the opportunity of know-
ing. It would seem, then, to be a primary duty to

232

The Duty of Doubt 233

learn to distinguish in our minds those matters which
we know directly from those matters which we have
accepted on trust ; and, secondly, to learn and to apply
the best modes of choosing the good and of rejecting
the bad authorities. The work of the scientific man is a
lifelong exercise of these primary duties. From the
first moment he begins to observe living things or to
dissect their dead frameworks, to mix chemical sub-
stances, to make experiments with magnets and wires,
he begins to build, and as long as he continues to
work he continues to build for himself a body of first-
hand knowledge. But, however he work arduously or
through long years, he can visit only the smallest por-
tion of the field of nature in which he is working. It
is necessary for him to employ the work of others, sub-
mitting, from time to time such accepted work to the
tests suggested by his own observations. He learns to
regard in a different light all knowledge taken on the
authority of others ; to distrust it a little until he has
learned to weigh its general credibility by his own
standards, and its particular credibility by subject-
ing portions of it to his own tests ; to distrust it still
more when even small portions fail to answer his tests,
and to reject it altogether when the percentage of de-
tected error is large. He learns, in fact, what Huxley
called the duty of doubt.

This duty has not been universally accepted. In the
histor}^ of Christian civilisation (and a parallel series
of events might be portraj^ed from the history of other
civilisations), many great institutions and very many
great and good men have condemned and feared the
habit and attitude of doubt in all its forms. Certain
doctrines believed to be of supreme importance to man-
kind were held to rest on authority independent of,

234 Thomas Henry Huxley

and perhaps not susceptible to, the kind of testing
employed in science. Around these doctrines there
grew, in time, a body of traditions, customs, new dog-
mas, and fantasies ; and the duty of belief in the first
was extended to cover the whole system, the central
jewel as well as the accretions and encrustations of
time. The domain of religious authority was extended
to the whole field of human thought and of human
action, and the more unreasonable the dominion be-
came, the more strenuously was the duty of belief
urged. The Protestant Reformation was one of the
great stages in the conflict for freedom against the
universal tyranny that had arisen, but the reformers
very naturally retained a considerable portion of the
bias against which they had fought. In Protestant
countries, in the first half of this century, the duty of
belief in the Protestant doctrines, traditions, philo-
sophy, historj', and attitude to science reigned supreme,
and all weapons, from legitimate argument to abusive
invective and social ostracism, were employed against
those who acted in accordance with the duty of doubt.
Allegations of " unsoundness " or of " free thinking "
became barriers to success in life, and those against
whom they were made became lowered in the esteem
of their fellows.

At the present time, when the advance of science
and of civilisation has almost won the battle for free-
dom of thought, it is difficult to realise the strength of
the forces against which Huxley and manj^ others had
to fight. Huxlej' himself said with perfect justice :
" I hardly know of a great physical truth whose uni-
versal reception has not been preceded by an epoch in
which most estimable persons have maintained that the
phenomena investigated were directly dependent on the

Lyell

and the Deluge 235

Divine Will, and that the attempt to investigate them
was not only futile but blasphemous." As a particular
instance of this he cited some episodes in the history
of geological science.

" At the present time, it is difficult to persuade serious scieu-
tific enquirers to occupy themselves, in any way, with the
Noachian Deluge. They look at you with a smile and a shrug,
and say they have more important matters to attend to than
mere antiquariauism. But it was not so in my youth. At
that time geologists and biologists could hardly follow to the
end any path of enquiry without finding the way blocked by
Noah and his ark, or by the first chapter of Genesis ; and it
was a serious matter, in this country at any rate, for a man to
be suspected of doubting the literal truth of the Diluvial or any
other Pentateuchal history. The fiftieth anniversary of the
foundation of the Geological Club (in 1824) was, if I remember
rightly, the last occasion on which the late Sir Charles Ivvell
spoke to even so small a public as the members of that body.
Our veteran leader lighted up once more ; and, referring to
the difficulties which beset his early efforts to create a rational
science of geology, spoke, with his wonted clearness and vig-
our, of the social ostracism which pursued him after the public-
ation of the Principles of Geology, in 1830, on account of the
obvious tendency of that noble work to discredit the Penta-
teuchal accounts of the Creation and the Deluge. If my
younger contemporaries find this hard to believe, I may refer
them to a grave book On the Doctrine of the Deluge, pub-
lished eight years later, and dedicated by the author to his
father, the then Archbishop of York. The first chapter refers
to the treatment of the 'Mosaic Deluge,' by Dr. Buckland
and Mr. Lyell, in the following terms : ' Their respect for re-
vealed religion has prevented them from arraying themselves
openly against the Scriptural account of it — much less do they
deny its truth — but they are in a great hurry to escape from
the consideration of it, and evidently concur in the opinion of
Linnaeus, that no proofs whatever of the Deluge are to be dis-
covered in the structure of the earth.' And after an attempt to
reply to some of Lyell's arguments, which it would be cruel to

236 Thomas Henry Huxley

reproduce, tlie writer continues: — 'When, therefore, upon
such slender grounds, it is determined, in answer to those who
insist on its universality, that the Mosaic Deluge must be con-
sidered a preternatural event, far beyond the reach of philo-
sophical enquiry ; not duly as to the causes employed to produce
it, but as to the effects most likely to result from it ; that de-
termination wears an aspect of scepticism, which, however
much soever it may be unintentional in the mind of the writer,
yet cannot but produce an evil impression on those who are
already predisposed to carp and cavil at the evidence of
Revelation.' "

The great evil of authority' was its tendency to erect
itself into some form of infallibility of universal appli-
cation. When, for a time, the geological victory was
won, and the supporters of authority had comforted
themselves with reconciliations, there arose the much
greater and more serious opposition between authority
and the conceptions involved in evolution. Huxley,
as we have seen in an earlier chapter, found that all
the old weapons of authority were resumed with a re-
newed assurance, and his advocacy of the duty of
doubt became not merely the defence of a great princi-
ple but a means of self-defence. The conception of
infallible authorit}^ had been transferred by Protestants
from the Church to the Bible, and against this Huxley
strove with all his might. It is convenient to reserve
a full treatment of Huxley's attitude to the Bible for a
separate chapter, but at this point a quotation will
shew his general view.

a^

" The truth is that the pretension to infallibility, by whom-
soever made, has done endless mischief; with impartial ma-
lignity it has proved a curse, alike to those who have made it
and those who have accepted it ; and its most banetul shape is
book infallibility. For sacerdotal corporations and schools

SIR CHARLES LYELL

Judges of Science 237

of philosophy are able, under due compulsion of opinion, to
retreat from positions that have become untenable ; while the
dead hand of a book sets and stiffens, amidst texts and form-
ulae, until it becomes a mere petrifaction, fit only for that
function of stumbling-block, which it so admirably performs.
Wherever bibliolatry has prevailed, bigotry and cruelty have
accompanied it. It lies at the root of the deep-seated, some-
times disguised, but never absent, antagonism of all varieties
of ecclesiasticism to the freedom of thought and to the spirit of
scientific investigation."

Moreover, Presbyter is but Priest writ large, and the
Protestant clergy were the leaders in denunciation of
every person and every branch of investigation or of
thought in any way connected with evolution. Hux-
ley was no respecter of persons, and, following the
example of Darwin, he was ready to study carefully
any arguments for or against any scientific doctrines
by whomsoever or howsoever brought forward. The
right of criticism and duty of doubt, which he insisted
on for himself, he was extremely willing to extend to
others, and, as a matter of fact he was on terms of inti-
mate friendship with some of his most distinguished
clerical opponents. But to an extent which it is al-
most impossible now to realise, the clergy generally
abused their legitimate position and authority, and
demanded or assumed a right to give authoritative
opinions on questions which did not come within their
domain. It was the old attempt of the Church to
make its authority felt in all departments of thought
and of action, and the attempt was made in the tradi-
tional fashion. Questions of fact were associated with
questions of morality, and those who held one view as
to the meaning and implication of certain facts were
denounced as wicked. Huxley at once carried the
war into the enemy's own country :

238 Thomas Henry Huxley

" And, seeing liow large a share of this clamour is raised by
the clergy of one denomination or another, may I say, in con-
clusion, that it really would be well if ecclesiastical persons
would reflect that ordination, whatever deep-seated graces it
may confer, has never been observed to be followed by any
visible increase in the learning or the logic of its subject.
Making a man a Bishop, or entrusting him with the office of
ministering to even the largest of Presbyterian congregations,
or setting him up to lecture to a church congress, really does
not in the smallest degree augment such title to respect as his
opinions may intrinsically possess. And when such a man
presumes on an authority, which was conferred on him for
other purposes, to sit in judgment on matters his incompetence
to deal with which is patent, it is permissible to ignore his
sacerdotal pretensions, and to tell him, as one would tell a
mere, common, unconsecrated layman : that it is not necessary
for any man to occupy himself with problems of this kind un-
less he so choose ; life is filled full enough with the perform-
ance of its ordinary and obvious duties. But that, if a man
elect to become a judge of these grave questions ; still more if
he assume the responsibility of attaching praise or blame to
his fellow-men for the conclusions at which they arrive touch-
ing them, he will commit a sin more grievous than most
breaches of the decalogue, unless he avoid a lazy reliance upon
the information that is gathered by prejudice and filtered
through passion, unless he go back to the prime sources of
knowledge — the facts of Nature, and the thoughts of those
wise men who for generations past have been her best
interpreters."

In the campaign for absolute freedom of thought,
for the duty of not believing anything except on suffi-
cient evidence, Huxley was frequently met by an argu-
ment of superficial strength, and which no doubt was
in the minds of many of his clerical opponents. In the
minds of a majority of people, it was said, and par-
ticularly of slightly educated people, the reasons for
right conduct and the distinctions between right and

Liberalism 239

wrong are firml}- associated with the Bible and with
religion. If 3'ou allow doubts as to the absolute verac-
ity of the Bible, or as to the supernatural origin of
religion to reach such persons, you run a grave risk
that they will reflect the uncertainty on the canons of
morality. In taking from them what you believe to
be false, inevitably you will unsettle their ideas on
moral questions although you might be in full agree-
ment as to these moral questions. Huxley refused to
accept the asserted association between morality and
particular metaphysical or religious doctrines.

" Many ingenious persons now appear to consider that the
incompatibility of pantheism, of materialism, and of any doubt
about the immortality of the soul, with religion and morality
is to be held as an axiomatic truth. I confess that I have a
certain difficulty in accepting this dogma. For the Stoics
were notoriously materialists and pantheists of the most ex-
treme character ; and while no strict Stoic believed in the
eternal duration of the individual soul, some even denied its
persistence after death. Yet it is equally certain, that, of all
gentile philosophies. Stoicism exhibits the highest ethical
development, is animated by the most religious spirit, and has
exerted the profoundest influence upon the moral and religious
development not merely of the best men among the Romans,
but among the moderns down to our own day."

He held the view now generally taken by students
of the histor}^ of man, that standards of conduct and
religious beliefs arose in separate ways and developed
independently, and that it was only comparatively'
recently that ' ' religion took morality under its pro-
tection." But he met the argument in a still more
direct fashion by rejecting entirely the possibility or
advisability of founding any S5^stem of ethics upon a
false basis.

"It is very clear to me," he wrote, "that, as Beelzebub is

240 Thomas Henry Huxley

tiot to be cast out by Beelzebub, so morality is not to be estab-
lished by immorality. It is, we are told, the special peculiarity
of the devil that he was a liar from the begiuniug. If we set
out in life with pretending to know that which we do not
know ; with professing to accept for proof evidence which we
are well aware is inadequate ; with wilfully shutting our eyes
and our ears to facts which militate against this or that com-
fortable hypothesis ; we are assuredly doing our best to deserve
the same character."

Freedom of thought meant for Huxley all that is
best in liberalism applied to life. In an essay on
Joseph Priestley, he described the condition of aflfairs
in England last centur}', when scientific investigation
and all forms of independent thinking laboured under
the most heavy restrictions that could be imposed by
dominant ecclesiastical and civil prejudice. He pointed
out the astounding changes between these times and
the times of to-day.

" If we ask," he wrote, " what is the deeper meaning of all
these vast changes, there can be but one reply. They mean
that reason has asserted and exercised her primacy over all the
provinces of human activity ; that ecclesiastical authority has
been relegated to its proper place ; that the good of the gov-
erned has been finally recognised as the end of government,
and the complete responsibility of governors to the people as
its means ; and that the dependence of natural phenomena in
general on the laws of action of what we call matter has
become an axiom."

The common ground of those who advocate the dut}^
of belief and those who insist on the duty of doubt is
clear. Both are agreed as to the necessity of accepting
whatever has sufficient evidence to support it ; both
agree that there is room for doubt though not neces-
sarily for rejection in cases where the evidence is con-
taminated or insufficient. It is in the application that

Agnosticism 241

the difference lies. The scientific theologian admits
the agnostic principle, however widely his results may
differ from those reached by the majority of agnostics.
" But, as between agnosticism and ecclesiasticism, or,
as our neighbours across the Channel call it, clerical-
ism, there can be neither peace nor truce. The cleric
asserts that it is morally wrong not to believe certain
propositions, whatever the results of a strict scientific
investigation of the evidence of these propositions.
He tells us that "religious error is, in itself, of an
immoral nature" (Newman). It necessarily follows
that, for him, the attainment of faith, not the ascert-
ainment of truth, is the highest aim of mental life."

Huxley helped largely in the modern movement
which has made it impossible to blame people for doubt,
and this was what he strove for most strenuously.
Freedom of thought, like freedom of the Press,
by no means implies that what is free must necessarily
be good. In both cases there may be a rank growth of
weeds, nurtured in vicious imagination, and finding
a ready market with the credulous mob. For the de-
tection and rejection of these, the critical method of
science serves as well as it does against the loftier
errors supported by authority.

It was on Descartes and on Hume that Huxley
founded the precise form in which he urged the duty
of doubt, and his exact words are worth quoting.

" It was in 1619, while meditating in solitary winter quarters,
that Descartes (being about the same age as Hume when he
wrote the Treatise oti Human Nature) made that famous
resolution, to "take nothing for truth without clear know-
ledge that it is such," the great practical effect of which is the
sanctification of doubt ; the recognition that the profession of
belief in propositions, of the truth of which there is no suflB-
cient evidence, is immoral ; the discrowning of authority as

242 Thomas Henry Huxley

such ; the repudiation of the confusion, beloved of sophists of
all sorts, between free assent and merely piously gagged dis-
sent, and the admission of the obligation to reconsider even
one's own axioms on due demand."

This was the healthy and active scepticism which took
no direct pleasure in doubting, but used doubt only as a
means of making knowledge doubly secure, and which
prevented false ideas being bolstered up by privilege
or by tyranny.

"The development of exact natural knowledge in all its vast
range, from physics to history and criticism, is the consequence
of the working out, in this province, of the resolution to take
nothing for truth without clear knowledge that it is such ; to
consider all beliefs open to criticism ; to regard the value of
authority as neither greater nor less than as much as it can
prove itself to be worth. The modern spirit is not the spirit
' which always denies,' delighting only in destruction ; still less
is it that which builds castles in the air rather than not construct;
it is the spirit which works and will work ' without haste and
without rest,' gathering harvest after harvest of truth into its
bams and devouring error with unquenchable fire."

It is a special weakness of the modern human race to
love inventing descriptive names by which particular
modes of thought may be classified and labelled. In
order to meet this demand, Huxley invented the word
agnosticism, to serve as a label for his own attitude. The
word rapidly became popular, and attempts were made
to read into it far more than its inventor implied. For
him it was no definite body of doctrine, no creed in any
positive sense. It merely expressed the attitude he as-
sumed towards all problems on which he regarded the
evidence as insufficient. It was a habit of mind rather
than a series of opinions or beliefs ; an intellectual
weapon and not materials on which to exercise the
intellect.

The Agnostic Method 243

Hume had written that " the jusiest and most plaus-
ible objection against a considerable part of metaphysics
was that they are not properly a science, but arise either
from the fruitless efforts of human vanity, which would
penetrate into subjects utterly inaccessible to the human
understanding, or from the craft of popular supersti-
tions, which, being unable to defend themselves on fair
ground, raise these entangling brambles to cover and
protect them." In these considerations he found
reason not for leaving superstition in possession of its
ground, but for making a bold and arduous attack upon
it in its haunts. The great difficulty in the way of
carrying the war into the enemy's own camp was that
in those days so-called science was itself cumbered
with many illogical and metaphysical ideas, and for the
first time in the present century the great advances of
physical science, and, in particular, the renewed life
poured by Darwin into the doctrine of evolution, made
it possible to bring a new series of exact arguments
against haz}^ metaphysical dogmas. The militant side
of agnosticism was directed against the camp of super-
stition and armed with the new weapons of exact
science. Its stern refusal of belief without adequate
evidence was a challenge to all the supporters of the
sanguine philosophy which replaces proof by assured
and emphatic statement and restatement. It is possible,
although rare, for those who hold a positive belief upon
evidence, howsoever insufficient, to leave their doubting
neighbours in peace, and these neighbours, assured in
their own beliefs, equally positive and perhaps equally
unfounded, may return the laz}^ tolerance. But the
agnostic position is at once a reproof and a challenge
to all who do not hold it. Perhaps no one has ever
put the agnostic attitude more clearly than Kant when

244 Thomas Henry Huxley

he wrote that ' ' the greatest and perhaps sole use of all
philosophy of pure reason, is, after all, merely nega-
tive, since it serves, not as an organ on (for the en-
largement of knowledge), but as a discipline for its
delimitation : and instead of discovering truth has
only the modest merit of preventing error." It is pre-
cisel)^ because it is addressed against error that agnos-
ticism brings not peace but a sword ; precisely because,
instead of adding to the beliefs of the world, it seeks
to examine them and perhaps by the examination to
diminish them, that it aroused passionate resentment.
In this respect it stands entirely separate and apart from
any other similar term, as all these implied a definite
acceptance or rejection of some definite propositions.
Agnosticism means none of these things. Huxley
said of it :

" Agnosticism, in fact, is not a creed but a method, the essence
of which lies in a rigorous application of a single principle. That
principle is of great antiquity ; it is as old as Socrates; as old as
the writer who said, ' Try all things, hold fast by that which is
good'; it is the foundation of the Reformation, which simply illus-
trated the axiom that every man should be able to give reason for
the faith that is in him ; it is the great principle of Descartes ; it
is the fundamental axiom of modern science. Positively the
principle may be expressed : In matters of the intellect, follow
your reason as far as it will take 5'ou, without regard to any
other consideration. And negatively : In matters of the intel-
lect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not
demonstrated or demonstrable. That I take to be the agnostic
faith, which, if a man keep whole and undefiled, he shall not
be ashamed to look the universe in the face, whatever the future
may have in store for him,"

CHAPTER XV

THK BIBI^E AND MIRACIvES

Why Huxley Came to Write about the Bible— A Magna Charta
of the Poor— The Theological Use of the Bible— The Doc-
trine of Biblical Infallibility— The Bible and Science— The
Three Hypotheses of the Earth's History— Changes in the
Past Proved — The Creation Hypothesis — Gladstone on Gen-
esis—Genesis not a Record of Fact— The Hypothesis of Evo-
lution— The New Testament — Theory of InsjSiratiou —
Reliance on the Miraculous — The Continuity ^of Nature no
c /rzor/ Argument against Miracles — Pqssi-bilities and Im-
possibilities—Miracles a Question of Evidence — Praise of
the Bible.

HUXIyKY was by training and habit of mind a nat-
uralist, busy with dissections and drawings, pur-
suing his branch of science for itself and with no
concern as to its possible relation to philosophical spec-
ulation or religious dogma. It is possible that, had his
life been passed under different conditions, his intel-
lectual activities might have been spent entirely on his
scientific work. As it was, he became almost more
widely known as a hostile critic of accepted religious
doctrine than as a man of science. Many causes con-
tributed to this effect, but the chief reason was the
contemporary attitude of the churches to Darwinism.

245

246 Thomas Henry Huxley

He tells lis as a matter of fact that in 1850, nine years
before the appearance of The Origin of Species, he
had "long done with the Pentateuchal cosmogony
which had been impressed on his childish understand-
ing as divine truth." In the chapter he contributed to
the Life of Darwvi he wrote that in his opinion
" the doctrine of evolution does not even come into con-
tact with theism, considered as a philosophical doc-
trine." The reason of his general attitude to the Bible
was simply that his application to it of the agnostic
method led him to the view that there was not sufficient
evidence for the pretensions assigned to it ; the reason
of his coming forward as a public and active champion
of his views in this matter was partly to make a counter
attack on the enemies of science, and partly his innate
respect for the propagation of truth. He had the inev-
itable respect of an Englishman for the English Bible
as one of the greatest books in our language, and we
have seen how he had advocated its adoption in schools.
He had the veneration for its ethical contents common
to the best thinkers of all ages since it came into exist-
ence, and few writers have ever emploj^ed loftier or
more direct language to express their respect and ad-
miration. As a venerator of freedom and of liberty he
regarded the Bible as the greatest text-book of freedom.

"Throughout the history of the Western world," he wrote,
" the Scriptures, Jewish and Christian, have been the great in-
stigators of revolt against the worse forms of clerical and poli-
tical despotism. The Bible has been the Magtia Charta of the
poor and of the oppressed ; down to modern times no State has
had a constitution in which the interests of the people are so
largely taken into account, in which the duties, so much more
than the privileges, of rulers are insisted upon, as that drawn
up for Israel in Deuteronomy and in Leviticus ; nowhere is the
fundamental truth that the welfare of the State, in the long

A Text-Book of Freedom 247

run, depends on the uprightness of the citizen so strongly laid
down. Assuredly the Bible talks no trash about the rights
of man ; but it insists on the equality of duties, on the liberty
to bring about that righteousness which is somewhat differ-
ent from struggling for ' rights ' ; on the fraternity of taking
thought for one's neighbour as for oneself."

It was not against the Bible but against the appHcations
made of it and implications read into it that he strove.

" In this nineteenth century, as at the dawn of modern phy-
sical science, the cosmogony of the semi-barbarous Hebrew is
the incubus of the philosopher and the opprobrium of the or-
thodox. Who shall number the patient and earnest seekers
after truth, from the days of Galileo until now, whose lives have
been embittered and their good name blasted by the mistaken
zeal of Bibliolators ? Who shall count the host of weaker men
whose sense of truth has been destroyed in the effort to har-
monise impossibilities — whose life has been wasted in the at-
tempt to force the generous new wine of science into the old
bottles of Judaism, compelled by the outcry of the same strong
party.-* It is true that if philosophers have suffered, their cause
has been amply avenged. Extinguished theologians lie about
the cradle of every science as the strangled snakes beside that
of Hercules ; and history records that whenever science and
orthodoxy have been fairly opposed, the latter has been forced
to retire from the lists, bleeding and crushed, if not annihilated ;
scotched, if not slain. But orthodoxy is the Bourbon of the
world of thought. It learns not, neither can it forget ; and
•though, at present, bewildered and afraid to move, it is as will-
ing as ever to insist that the first chapter of Genesis contains
the beginning and the end of sound science ; and to visit, with
such petty thunderbolts as its half-paralysed hands can hurl,
those who refuse to degrade Nature to the level of primitive
Judaism."

These words were written in i860 and events have
moved rapidly since Huxley wrote them. There is
now practically no religious body containing a propor-
tion of educated persons which does not allow within it

248 Thomas Henry Huxley

a very wide range of opinion as to the inspiration of
the Scriptures, the Biblical account of the Creation,
the miraculous events of the Old Testament and the
recorded miracles of the New. Within the last few
months, Dr. St. George Mivart, a distinguished Catho-
lic zoologist and long an opponent of Huxlej^ has de-
clared that within the Catholic Church itself a number
of educated persons are prepared to accept most of Hux-
ley's positions, as well as views more extremely icono-
clastic than any advanced by Huxle3^ Although Dr.
Mivart' s outspoken words have called down on him
the official thunders of Rome, it is an open secret that
many good Catholics think this attempted exclusion of
modern knowledge to be fraught with grave danger to
the Church. In these matters the Protestant churches
have advanced much farther.

It was very different when Huxley wrote. The first
and gravest difficulty placed in the way of science was
the asserted infallibility of the Scriptures. In Catholic
theology, at least until late in this century, the general
tendency has been to regard the Bible rather as a quarry
for doctrine than as a direct means of grace. The the-
ory of religion rested on two pillars : the inspired
Scriptures containing the necessary information and the
inspired Church to interpret the Scriptures. Protestant
theology had rejected the infallible inspiration of the
Church, and, in consequence, had thrown a greater
burden on the Scriptures. The Scriptures became the
Word of God, verbally and literally true ; in its extreme
form this doctrine reverted almost to the ancient Rab-
binical maxim that even the vowel points and accents
were of divine origin. In practice, if not in theory, the
halo was extended to cover even the marginal chrono-
logy, then a familiar feature in the editions of the

The Bible and Science 249

English Bible, The present writer, even so lately as in
1888 was reproved with violence by a clergyman of
considerable education and position for expressing a
doubt as to the accuracy of these dates. Obviously
there was no common measure between a church hold-
ing such views and advancing science. War was in-
evitable, until one side or the other should give way.

Huxley conducted the attack in a series of contro-
versies extending over many years, and in which his
opponents were well-known laymen such as Mr. Glad-
stone, Dr. St. George Mivart, the Duke of Argyll,
and many clerical dignitaries of different denomina-
tions. The most important of his contributions to
these controversies, as well as several isolated essays
and addresses, have been collected in two volumes,
Science and the Hebrew Tradition^ and Science afid the
Christian Tradition.

The first stage in the controversy, and the stage most
immediately pressing, was to shew that the Bible was
misleading and inaccurate as a record of scientific fact,
and that therefore it could not be brought forward as
evidence against scientific doctrines supported by
scientific evidence. The vital matter in this was the
account given in Genesis of the origin of the world.
If that disappeared then the whole ground was gained ;
science would be left free in its own sphere.

In a lecture on Evolution, delivered in 1876, Huxley
began by discussing the possibilities as to the past
history of nature. He believed that there were only
three hypotheses which had been entertained or which
well could be entertained respecting this history. The
first was to assume that phenomena of nature similar
to those exhibited by the world at present had alwa3^s
existed ; in fact that the universe had existed from

250 Thomas Henry Huxley

all eternit}' in what might be termed, broadly, its
present condition. The second hypothesis was that
the present condition of things had had only a limited
duration, and that, at some period of the past, what
we now know came into existence without any re-
lation of natural causation to an antecedent state.
The third hypothesis also assumed that the present
condition of things had had a limited duration, but
it supposed that that condition had been derived by
natural processes from an antecedent condition, the
hypothesis attempting to set no limits to the series
of changes.

In a certain sense, the first hypothesis recalls the
doctrine of uniformitarianism, which Hutton and
Lyell had shaped from a rational interpretation of the
present conditions of nature. But, although it is no
longer necessary to imagine the past history of the
earth as a series of gigantic catastrophes, yet the whole
record of science is against the supposition that any-
thing like the existing state of nature has had an
eternal duration. The record of fossils shews that the
living population of the earth has been entirely dif-
ferent at different epochs. Geological history shews
that, whether these changes have come about by swift
catastrophes, or by slow, enduring movements, the
surface of the globe, its distribution into land and
water, the character of these areas and the conditions
of climate to which they have been subjected have
passed through changes on a colossal scale. Moreover,
if we look from this earth to the universe of stars and
suns and planets, we see ever3^where evidence of unceas-
ing change. If we use scientific observation and reason,
if we employ on the problem the only means we pos-
sess for attempting its solution, we cannot accept the

Gladstone on Genesis 251

h5'pothesis that the present condition of nature has
been eternal.

"So far as that limited revelation of the nature of things,
which we call scientific knowledge, has yet gone, it tends,
with constantly increasing emphasis, to the belief that, not
merely the world of plants, but that of animals ; not merely
living things but the whole fabric of the earth ; not merely our
planet but the whole solar system, not merely our star and its
satellites, but the millions of similar bodies which bear witness
to the order which pervades boundless space and has endured
through boundless time, are all working out their predestined
courses of evolution."

The second h^^pothesis is familiar to us in the sacred
records of many religions and in the Hebrew Script-
ures. Most of these have a fundamental similarity,
inasmuch as they oflfer pictures in which the mode
and order of creation are given in the minutest detail
and with the simplest kind of anthropomorphism ; in
which the Creator is represented with familiar human
characteristics. But these general considerations, so
obvious now that we have learned to read the Bible
narrative without passion or prejudice, were not plain
to the early opponents of evolution, and it was neces-
sar}'^, step by step, to shew not only that the narrative
in Genesis could not be reconciled with known facts
if it were accepted in its literal meaning, but that the
most strained interpretation of the language failed to
bring it into accordance with scientific truth. Mr.
Gladstone was the latest and most vigorous of those
who attempted to reconcile Genesis with modern
knowledge, and in his controversy with Huxley he
brought to bear all the resources of an acute intellect
trained by long practice in the devices of argument
and inspired by a lofty if mistaken enthusiasm. In
the course of his argument he wrote :

252 Thomas Henry Huxley

" But the question is uot here of a lofty poem, or a skilfully
coustructed narrative ; it is whether natural science, in the
patient exercise of its high calling to examine facts, finds that
the works of God cry out against what we have fondly believed
to be His word and tell another tale ; or whether, in this nine-
teenth century of Christian progress, it substantially echoes
back the majestic sound, which, before it existed as a pursuit,
went forth into all lands.

First, looking largely at the latter portion of the narrative,
which describes the creation of living organisms, and waiving
details, on some of which (as in v. 24) the Septuagint seems to
vary from the Hebrew, there is a grand fourfold division, set
forth in an orderly succession of times as follows : on the fifth
day

1. The water-population.

2. The air-population,
aud, on the sixth day,

3. The land-population of animals.

4. The land-populatiou consummated in man.

Now this same fourfold order is understood to have been so
affirmed in our time by natural science, that it may be taken
as a demonstrated conclusion and established fact."

The defence itself shewed that already a large part
of the original position had been abandoned. The
literal meaning and belief in detailed accuracy were
given up and Mr. Gladstone sought to establish only a
general correspondence between the Biblical narrative
and the results of science. But even in that form
Huxley shewed the defence to be untenable.

*' I can meet the statement in the last paragraph of the
above citation," he replied, " with nothing but a direct nega-
tive. If I know anything at all about the results attained by
the natural science of our time, it is a ' demonstrated conclu-
sion and established fact ' that the fourfold order given by Mr.
Gladstone is not that in which the evidence at our disposal
tends to shew that the water, air, and land populations of our
globe made their appearance."

Genesis Not a Record of Fact 253

With the most voluminous detail, he proceeds to shew
that there is no possible relation between the order
implied by the narrative and the order as revealed b}'
science. I^et us sum up, by two quotations, the result
of the whole controversy. First, the literal meaning
is untenable.

" The question whether the earth and the immediate pro-
genitors of its present living population were made in six
natural days or not is no longer one on which two opinions
can be held. The fact that it did not come so into being
stands upon as sound a basis as any fact of history whatever.
It is not true that existing plants and animals came into being
within three days of the creation of the earth out of nothing,
for it is certain that innumerable generations of other plants
and animals lived upon the earth before its present population.
And when, Sunday after Sunday, men who profess to be our
instructors in righteousness read out the statement, ' In six
days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in
them is,' in innumerable churches, they are either propagating
what they may easily know, and, therefore, are bound to
know, to be falsities ; or, if they use the words in some non-
natural sense, they fall below the moral standard of the much
abused Jesuit."

The attenuated meaning equally must be given up.

"Even if they (the reconcilers) now allow that the words
' the evening and the morning ' have not the least reference to
a natural day, but mean a period of any number of millions of
years that may be necessary ; even if they are driven to admit
that the word 'creation,' which so many millions of pious
Jews and Christians have held, and still hold, to mean a sud-
den act of the Deity,. signifies a process of gradual evolution of
one species from another, extending through immeasurable
time ; even if they are willing to grant that the asserted co-
incidence of the order of nature with the 'fourfold order'
ascribed to Genesis is an obvious error instead of an established
truth, they are surely prepared to make a last stand upon the
conception which underlies the whole, and which constitutes

2 54 Thomas Henry Huxley

the essence of Mr. Gladstone's ' fourfold division, set forth in
an orderly succession of times.' It is that the animal species
which compose the water-population, the air-population, and
the land-population, respectively, originated during three dis-
tinct and successive periods of time, and only during these
periods of time. . . . But even this sublimated essence of
the Pentateuchal doctrine remains as discordant with natural
science as ever."

There remains the third, or evoliitionar}' hj^pothesis
regarding the origin of the existing order of nature.
As Huxley held it, it was rigidly Umited within the
possibilities afforded by the agnostic attitude. With
regard to the real nature, the origin and destiny of
the whole universe, there was not sufficient evidence
before the human mind, if indeed the human mind
were capable of receiving such evidence, to come to
any conclusion. For the rest, for the actual condition
of the earth itself, science was gradually accumulating
overwhelming evidence in favour of a continuous
evolution, under natural agencies, from the beginning
of life to the existing forms of animals and plants,
and the actual origin of hfe from inorganic matter un-
der similarly natural agencies was becoming more and
more a legitimate inference,

Huxley's relation to the New Testament may be
summed up in few words. It was simply that there
was not sufficient evidence for ascribing to it the super-
natural sanction demanded for it by dogmatic theology.

" From the dawn of scientific Biblical criticism until the
present day, the evidence against the long-cherished notion
that the three synoptic gospels are the work of three independ-
ent authors, each prompted by Divine inspiration, has steadily
accumulated, until, at the present time, there is no visible
escape from the conclusion that each of the three is a compil-
ation consisting of a groundwork common to all three— the

The New Testament 255

three-fold tradition ; aud of a superstructure consisting, firstly,
of matter common to it with one of the others, and, secondly,
of matter common to each."

Again : — ' ' There is no proof, nothing more than a
fair presumption, that anj^ one of the gospels existed,
in the state in which we find it in the authorised
version of the Bible, before the second century, or, in
other words, sixty or seventy years after the events
recorded." These considerations with slight differ-
ences in details are now practically admitted among
the abler apologists, with the result that, as Huxley
claimed, the New Testament, like the Old, must be
treated as Literature rather than as Dogma. As
Literature everyone has the right to examine the
contents critically, and, considering the importance at-
tributed to the contents, the right becomes a duty.
No doubt, had Huxley not lived there would have
been others equally ready and equally able to gain the
battle for freedom of thought in its special application
to the claim of the Bible to stand in the way of the
advance of scientific knowledge ; but as it is, it can-
not be denied that the existing prevalence of liberal
views, inside and outside the churches, on the nature
and interpretation of the Scriptures is largely due to
him.

After the question of inspiration, the most striking
feature of the Bible is its appeal to miracles and the
miraculous element. It is now necessary to examine
the position asstimed by Huxley towards these. Two
great a priori difficulties have been brought against
accepting any record of miracles as true. The first of
these is very simple, depending on the history of all
times and peoples. It is that the human race has
shewn itself universally credulous in this matter. It

256 ^ Thomas Hcnr)- Huxley

has cried "Wolf! " so readily, so honestly, and on so
many occasions that the cr}^ has ceased to carry
conviction with it. Every religion has its series of
miraculous events ; everj'- savage tribe and every un-
educated race has its miracle-workers implicitly ac-
cepted. In mediaeval and modern Europe up to our
own times, miracles have been so constantly recorded
on testimon}' of such undoubted integrity that we must
either believe that miracles can be performed by num-
berless persons with no other claim to special regard,
or that it is singularly easy to get false but honest evid-
ence regarding them. Huxley supported the latter
alternative strongly, and held the view that to believe
in any particular miracles would require evidence very
much more direct and very much stronger than would
be necessary in the case of inherently probable events.
The second a priori objection to the credibility of
miracles has been urged more strongly, but was not
accepted by Huxle5^ It is that miracles are inherently
incredible inasmuch as they are ' ' violations of the or-
der of nature." Hume, attacking miracles, had made
this objection the chief ground of his argument.
Huxley paid a logical respect, at least as great, to the
contiuuit}^ of nature.

"When the experience of generation after generation is re-
corded, and a single book tells us more than Methuselah
could have learned, had he spent every waking hour of his
thousand years in learning ; when apparent disorders are found
to be only the recurrent pulses of a slow-working order, and
the wonder of a year becomes the commonplace of a centurj- ;
when repeated and minute examination never reveals a break
in the chain of causes and effects ; and the whole edifice of
practical life is built upon our faith in its continuity ; the
belief that that chain has never been broken and will never
be broken, becomes one of the strougest and most justifiable

Belief In the Miraculous 257

of human convictions. And it must be admitted to be a
reasonable request, if we ask those who would have us put
faith in the actual occurrence of interruptions of that order,
to produce evidence in favour of their view, not only equal,
but superior, in weight, to that which leads us to adopt ours."

But otit of the month of Hume himself he declared
against making the recorded experience of man, how-
ever lengthy and impressive, a necessary ground fur
rejecting the possibility of the miraculous. Hume
had said, "Whatever is intelligible and can be dis-
tinctly conceived implies no contradiction, and can
never be proved false by any demonstration, argument,
or reasoning, a priori.'" This or the like applies to
most of the recorded miracles. Huxle)^ was extremely
careful not to assert that they were incredible merely
because they might involve conditions otitside our
existing experience. It is a vulgar mistake, for which
science certaiuly gives no warrant, to assert that
things are impossible because they contradict our ex-
perience. In such a sense many of the most com-
mon modern conveniences of life would have seemed
impossible a centtiry ago. To travel with safety sixty
miles an hour, to talk through the telephone with a
friend an hundred miles away, to receive intelligible
messages across the Atlantic b}^ a cable, and, still more,
to communicate b}'- wireless telegraphy would have
seemed impossible imtil recently. At the present
time, the conversion of a baser metal into gold would
be called impossible hy everyone with a little know-
ledge of elementary chemistr}'. This last example
leads admirabl}^ to a right understanding of the sci-
entific view of impossibility. The older alchemists,
partly from ignorance and partly from credulity, be-
lieved absolutely in the possibility of transmuting the
17

258 Thomas Henry Muxley

metals. Tlie advance of chemical science led to defin-
ite conceptions of the differences between compounds
and elementarj- bodies, and of the independence of
these elements. The methods and reasoning of the
alchemists became absurd, and no one would attempt
seriously to transmute the metals on their lines. These
advances, however, do not give us the right to assume
that the elements are absolutely independent, and that
transmutation is therefore impossible. Some of the
most recent progress in chemistry has opened up the
suggestion that the elements themselves are differ-
ent combinations of a common substance. Huxley
applied this particular argument to the miracle at the
marriage of Cana.

"You are quite mistaken in supposing that anybody who is
acquainted with the possibilities of physical science will under-
take categorically to deny that water may be turned into wine.
Many very competent judges are inclined to think that the
bodies which we have hitherto regarded as elementary are
really composite arrangements of the particles of a uniform
primitive matter. Supposing that view to be correct, there
would be no more theoretical difficulty about turning water
into alcohol, ethereal and colouring matters, than there is, at
this present moment, any practical difficulty in working other
such miracles; as when we turn sugar into alcohol, carbonic
acid, glycerine, and succinic acid ; or transmute gas-refuse
into perfumes rarer than musk and dyes richer than Tyrian
purple."

Unless we make the unscientific and preposterous
assumption that our present knowledge of nature and
of natural forces is absolute and complete, it is un-
scientific and illogical to declare at once that any
supposed events could not have happened merely
because they seem to have contradicted so-called
natural laws.

Miracles a Question of Evidence 259

"Strictly speakiug," Huxley wrote, "I am unaware of any-
thing that has a right to the title of an ' impossibility ' except
a contradiction in terms. There are impossibilities logical,
but none natural. A 'round square,' a 'present past,' 'two
parallel lines that intersect,' are impossibilities, because the
ideas denoted by the predicates, round, present, intersect,
are contradictory of the ideas denoted by the subjects, square,
past, parallel. But walking on water, or turning water into
wine, or procreation without male intervention, or raising the
dead, are plainly not impossibilities in this sense."

The whole matter turns on the question of sufficient
evidence.

"Hume's arguments resolve themselves into a simple state-
ment of the dictates of common sense which may be expressed
in this canon : the more a statement of fact conflicts with
previous experience, the more complete must be the evidence
which is to justify us in believing it."

Again, expressing the same idea in different words,
he wrote :

" Nobody can presume to say what the order of nature must
be ; all that the widest experience (even if it extended over all
past time and through all space) that events had happened in
a certain way could justify, would be a proportionately strong
expectation that events will go on so happening, and the
demand for a proportional strength of evidence in favour of
any assertion that they had happened otherwise. It is this
weighty consideration, the truth of which everyone who is
capable of logical thought must surely admit, which knocks
the bottom out of all a priori objections either to ordinary
' miracles ' or to the efficacy of prayer, in so far as the latter
implies the miraculous intervention of a higher power. No
one is entitled to say, a priori, that prayer for some change in
the ordinary course of nature cannot possibly avail."

It was a question of evidence, and not only did the
evidence not convince Huxley, but the thaumaturgic

26o Tliomas Mcnry Huxley

nature of the Biblical miracles provided him with addi-
tional reason for refusing to attach any extrinsic value
to the contents of the book.

On the other hand, although he declined to accept
the Bible as a miraculous and authentic revelation, again
and again he expressed himself in the strongest terms
as to its value to mankind, and as to the impossibility of
any scientific advance diminishing in any way whatso-
ever that value.

"The antagonism between religion and science, about which
we hear so much, appears to me to be purely factitious — fabric-
ated, on the one hand, by shortsighted religious people who
confound a certain branch of science, theology, with religion ;
and, on the other, by equally shortsighted scientific people who
forget that science takes for its province only that which is sus-
ceptible of clear intellectual comprehension; and that, outside
the boundaries of that province, they must be content with
imagination, with hope, and with ignorance."

And again ;

" In the eighth century B.C., in the heart of a world of idola-
trous polytheists, the Hebrew prophets put forth a conception
of religion which appears to me to be as wonderful an inspira-
tion of genius as the art of Pheidias or the science of Aristotle.
' And what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and
to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God ? ' If any so-
called religion takes away from this great saying of Micah, I
think it wantonly mutilates, while if it adds thereto, I think
it obscures, the perfect ideal of religion."

CHAPTER XVI

ETHICS OF THE COSMOS

Conduct and Metaphysics— Conventional and Critical Minds —
Good and Evil — Huxley's Last Appearance at Oxford — Tbe
Ethical Process and the Cosmic Process— Man's Interven-
tion— The Cosmic Process Evil— Ancient Reconciliations —
Modern Acceptance of the Difficulties— Criticism of Hux-
ley's Pessimism — Man and his Ethical Aspirations Part of
the Cosmos.

WE have seen that Huxley reftised to acquiesce in
the current orthodox doctrine that otir systems
of morality rested on a special revelation, miraculous
in its origin, and vouched for by the recorded miracles
of its Fomider, or by those entrusted by the Fotinder
with miraculous power. He supported the view that,
historically and actually, there is no necessary connec-
tion between religion and morality. The one is an at-
tempt, in his opinion always unsuccessful, to lift the veil
from the unseen, to know the unknowable ; the other
is simply the code that social man, through the ages,
has elaborated for his own guidance, and proved by his
own experience. So far as the conduct of life goes, the
morality of one who accepts the agnostic position with
regard to revelation and the iniseen universe differs in
no respect from the code taken under the protection of

261

262 Thomas Henry Huxley

the modern forms of religion. As John Morle}-, in his
Essay on J ^oltaire wrote of such a person :

" There are new solutions for him, if the old have fallen dumb.
If he no longer believe death to be a stroke from the sword of
God's justice, but the leaden footfall of an inflexible law of
matter, the humility of his awe is deepened, and the tenderness
of his pit)' made holier, that creatures who can love so much
should have their days so shut round with a wall of darkness.
The purifying anguish of remorse will be stronger, not weaker,
when he has trained himself to look upon every wrong in
thought, every duty omitted from act, each infringement of the
inner spiritual law which humanity is constantlv perfecting for
its own guidance and advantage, less as a breach of the decrees
of an unseen tribunal than as an ungrateful infection weaken-
ing and corrupting the future of his brothers."

But there are wider questions than the immediate
problems of conduct. A certain type of mind finds it
almost impossible not to attempt ethical judgments on
the whole universe, not to speculate whether the Cos-
mos, as we can imagine it from the part of it within the
cognisance of man, offers a spectacle of moral or im-
moral or of non-moral significance. In the old times of
Greece and in the modern world many have been devoid
of the taste for argument on such subjects. Those who
are uninterested in these abstract discussions are rarely
in opposition to the mode of faith surrounding them,
as to reject the doctrines held by the majority of one's
friends and associates implies either a disagreeable dis-
position or an unusual interest in ultimate problems ;
they are usually orthodox according to their environ-
ment— Stoics, Epicureans, Jews, Kpiscopalians, Catho-
lics, Quakers, Methodists, Mormons, Mohammedans,
Buddhists, or whatever may be the prevailing dogma
around them. The attitude of indifference to moral

Conventional and Critical Minds 26

o

philosopln- has practically no relation to what may be
considered good or bad moral conduct ; those charac-
terised by it live above or below or round about their
own moral standards in a fashion as variable as that of
moral philosophers. Many of the saints, ancient and
modern, have been notorious instances ; question them
as to their faith or as to the logical foundation of their
renunciations and they will tell you in simple honesty
or make it plain by their answers that they have no
head for logic, that they cannot argue, but onl}^ know
and feel their position to be true. In addition to the
saints, many of the best and most of the pleasant peo-
ple in the world are of this type.

The type strongly in contrast with the foregoing is
found in persons of a more strenuous, perhaps more
admirable but less agreeable character. The savour of
acerbity may be a natural attribute of the critical char-
acter, and it is certainly not lessened where moral
philosophy is the subject-matter of the criticism. The
continual search after solutions of problems that may
be insoluble at least makes the seekers excellent judges
of wrong solutions. Like Luther and Loyola and
Kant, the}' may be able to satisfy themselves, or, like
Huxley, thej^ may remain in doubt, but in either case
they are excellent critics of the solutions of others.
The}' are the firebrands of faith or of negation ; thc}-
are possessed by an intellectual fury that will not let
them cease from propagandising. They must go
through the world as mis.sionaries ; and the missionary
spirit is dual, one side zealous to proclaim the new, the
other equally zealous to denounce the old. But theirs
is the great work, " to burn old falsehood bare," to tear
away the incrustations of time which people have come
to accept as the thing itself, and in their track new and

264 Thomas Henry Huxley

lively trutli springs up, as fresh green follows the de-
vastations of fire.

To most of us it seems of sufficient importance and
of sufficient difficult}- to make our decisions in the little
eddies of good and evil that form as the world-stream
breaks round our individual lives. Huxley strove to
interpret the world-stream itself, to translate its move-
ments into the ethical language of man. As knowledge
of the forces and movements of the Cosmos has increased
so has our general conception been intensified, our con-
ception of it as a wondrous display of power and
grandeur and superhuman fixity of order. But are
the forces of the Cosmos good or evil ? Are we, and
the Cosmos of which we are a part, the sport of change-
able and capricious deities, the pawns in a game of the
gods, as some of the Greeks held ; or of a power drunk-
enly malicious, as Heine once cynically suggested ; or
a battle-ground for a force of good and a force of evil
as in so many Eastern religions? Are we dominated
b}^ pure evil, as some dark creeds have held, or by
pure good, as the religion of the Western world teaches ?
And if we are dominated by pure evil, whence come
good and the idea of good, or, if by pure good, whence
evil and the idea of evil ?

Huxley's interest in these great problems appears
and reappears throughout his published writings, but
his views are most clearl}' and systematically exposed
in his " Romanes " lecture on " Evolution and Ethics "
delivered and published at Oxford in 1894, and after-
wards republished with a prefatory essay in the last
volume of his Collected Essays. Not long before his
death. Professor Romanes, who had come to live in
Oxford, founded a University lectureship, the purpose
of which was that once a year a distinguished man

Last Appearance at Oxford 265

should address the University on a subject neither re-
ligious nor political. Mr. Gladstone was the first lect-
urer, and, at the suggestion of the founder, Huxle)^
was chosen as the second. For years he had been tak-
ing a special interest in both religion and politics, and
he was not a little embarrassed by the restrictions im-
posed by the terms of the foundation, for he determined
to make ethical science the subject of his address, and

"ethical science is, on all sides, so entangled with religion
and politics, that the lecturer who essays to touch the former
without coming in contact with either of the latter, needs all
the dexterity of an egg-dancer, and may even discover that
his sense of clearness and his sense of propriety come into con-
flict, by no means to the advantage of the former."

As Huxle}-, on that great occasion, ascended the
rostrum in the Sheldonian theatre, very white and frail
in his scarlet doctor's robes, there mtist have been
present in his mind memories of the occasion, four-and-
thirty years before, when he first addressed an audience
in the University of Oxford. Then he was a 570ung
man, almost tmknown, rising to lead what seemed a
forlorn hope for an idea titterly repugnant to most of
his hearers. Now, and largel}- b}- his own efforts, the
idea had become an inseparable part of human thotight,
and Huxley himself was the guest to whom the whole
University was doing honour. Graduates from all
parts of England had come to hear what, it was feared,
might be his last public speech, and practically every
member of the University who could gain admission
was present. The press of the world attended to report
his words as if they were those of a great political leader,
about to decide the fate of nations. Although his voice
had lost mtich of its old sonorous reach, and althotigh
the old clear rhythms were occasionally broken by

266 Thomas Henry Huxley

hesitancies, the magic of his personaHty oriented to
him even' face.

It is a curious and striking circumstance, a circum-
stance fully recognised by Huxley himself, that in this
exposition of his ethical conception of the Cosmos he
reconstructed, on the lines of his evolutionary philo-
sophy one of the oldest and most widespread theories, a
theor}^ again and again reached by men of different civil-
isations and epochs. Manes, the Persian, from whose
name the word " Manicheism " has been coined to
denote his doctrine, taught in perhaps the most explicit
fashion that the Cosmos was the battle-ground of two
contending powers, — Ahriman, the principle of evil,
and Ormuzd, the principle of good. This doctrine in
some form or other is implicit in most of the greater re-
ligions, some of which have assumed an ultimate tri-
ixmph for the principle of good, while others have left
the issue doubtful. The Ahriman of Huxley, the prin-
ciple of evil, is what he termed the cosmic process, that
great pla}' of forces, by which, in a ruthless struggle for
existence, the fittest (b}- which is meant the most suited
to the surrounding conditions and not necessarih^ the
ethically best) have survived at the expense of the less
fit. The Ormuzd, the principle of good, is what Hux-
ley called the Ethical process, the process b)^ which
sentient, intelligent, and moral man has striven to replace
the " old ape and tiger methods " of the cosmic process,
by methods in which justice and mercy, sacrifice and
consideration for others have a part.

To explain clearh' the distinction he made between the
ethical and cosmic processes, Huxley, in the prefatory
essay (" Prolegomena ") published in the volume with
his Romanes lecture, developed the analogy of a culti-
vated garden reclaimed from surrounding wild nature.

Intervention of Man 267

He described how the countryside, visible from his
windows at Eastbourne, had certainly been in a " state
of nature ' ' about two thousand years ago when Csesar
had set foot in Britain and had made the Roman camps,
the remains of which still mark the chalk downs of
England.

"Except, it may be, by raisiug a few sepulchral mounds,
such as those which still, here aud there, break the flowing
contours of the Downs, man's hands had made no mark upon
it ; and the thin veil of vegetation which overspread the broad-
backed heights and the shelving sides of the coombs was unaf-
fected by his industry. The native grasses and weeds, the
scattered patches of gorse, contended with one another for pos-
session of the scanty surface soil ; they fought against the
droughts of summer, the frosts of winter, and the furious gales,
which swept with unbroken force, now from the Atlantic, and
now from the North Sea, at all times of the year ; they filled
up, as they best might, the gaps made in their ranks by all
sorts of overground and underground ravagers. One year with
another, an average population, the floating balance of the un-
ceasing struggle for existence among the indigenous plants,
maintained itself. It is as little to be doubted that an essen-
tially similar state of nature prevailed in this region for many
thousand years before the coming of Caesar ; and there is no
assignable reason for denying that it might continue to exist
through an equally prolonged futurity except for the interven-
tion of man."

This present state of nature, he explained, is onlj- a
fleeting phase of a process that has gone on for millions
of years. Under the thin layer of soil are the chalk
cliffs, hundreds of feet thick and witnesses of the en-
tirely different phases of the struggle that went on
while the cliffs were being formed at the bottom of the
chalk sea, when the vegetation of the nearest land was
as different from the existing vegetation as that is dif-
ferent from the trees and flowers of an African forest.

268 Thomas 1 Icnry Huxley

"Before the deposition of the chalk, a vastly longer period
elapsed, throughout which it is easy to follow the traces of the
same process of ceaseless modification and of the same inter-
ueciue struggle for existence of living things; and when we
can go no further back, it is not because there is any reason to
think we have reached the beginning, but because the trail of
the most ancient life remains hidden or has become obliterated."

The state of nature, then, is a fleeting and imper-
manent process.

"That which endures is not one or other association of living
forms, but the process of which the Cosmos is the product and
of which these are among the transitory expressions. And in
the living world, one of the most characteristic features of this
cosmic process is the struggle for existence, the competition of
each with all, the result of which is the selection, that is to say,
the survival of those forms which, on the whole, are best adapted
to the conditions which at any period obtain ; and which are,
therefore, in that respect, and only in that respect, the fittest.
The acme reached by the cosmic process in the vegetation of the
Downs is seen in the turf with its weeds and gorse. Under the
conditions, they have come out of the struggle victorious ; and,
by surviving, have proved that they are the fittest to survive."

For three or four years, the state of nature in a small
portion of the Downs stirrounding Huxley's house had
been put an end to by the intervention of man.

"The patch was cut off from the rest by a wall ; within the
area thus protected the native vegetation was, as far as possible,
extirpated, while a colony of strange plants was imported and
set down in its place. In short, it was made into a garden.
This artificially treated area presents an aspect extraordinarily
different from that of so much of the land as still remains in
the state of nature outside the wall. Trees, shrubs and herbs,
many of them appertaining to the state of nature in remote
parts of the globe, abound and flourish. Moreover, consider-
able quantities of vegetables, fruit, and flowers are produced,
of kinds which neither now exist nor have ever existed ex-
cept under conditions such as obtain in the garden and which

Intervention of JMan 269

therefore are as much works of the art of man as the frames and
glass-houses in which some of them are raised. That the 'state
of art' thus created in the state of nature by man, is sustained
by and dependent on him, would at once become apparent if
the watchful supervision of the gardener were withdrawn, and
the antagonistic influences of the general cosmic process were
no longer sedulously warded off, or couuteracted."

He proceeds to describe how, under such circum-
stances, the artificial barriers would decay, and the
delicate inhabitants of the garden would perish under
the assatilts of animal and vegetable foes. External
forces w^ould reassert themselves and wild nature would
resume its sway. While, in a sense, he had strenuously
advocated the unity of all nature, he found in it two
rivals : the artificial products of sentient man and the
forces and products of wild nature. These two he be-
lieved to be in inevitable opposition and to represent
the good and the evil forces of the world.

In the dim ages of the past, the forces that have gone
to the making of man have been part of the cosmic
process. In the endless and wonderful series of kaleid-
oscopic changes by which, under the operation of natural
laws, the body, habits, and the character of man have
been elaborated slowly from the natal dust, there is the
widest field for the operation of the most acute intellig-
ence to study and trace the stages in the process. But
if intellectual delight in studying the process be left out
of account, a serious question at once appears. In the
higher stages of evolution the cosmic forces, ceasing to
act merely on insentient matter, have operated on sen-
tient beings, and in so doing have given rise to the
mystery of pain and suffering. When the less fit of
chemical combinations or even of the lower forms of
life perished in the struggle, we ma}^ regard the process

2/0 Thomas Henry Huxley

with the unemotional eye of pure intelligence. But
"pain, the baleful product of evolution, increases in
quantity and in intensity with advancing stages of ani-
mal organisation, until it attains its highest level in
man," And so it comes about that the cosmic process
produces evil, sorrow, and suffering. Consideration of
the cosmic process leads up against the mystery of
evil.

Huxley argued that the various philosophies and
civilisations of the past had led by different paths to a
similar conclusion. The primitive ethical codes of man
were not unlike the compacts of a wolf-pack, the under-
standing to refrain from mutual attack during the chase
of a common prey. Conceptions of this kind became
arranged in codes and invested with supernatural sanc-
tion. But in Hindustan and Ionia alike, material pro-
sperity, no doubt partly the result of the accepted codes,
produced culture of the intellect and culture of the
pleasures. With these came the " beneficent demon,
doubt, whose name is legion and who dwells amongst
the tombs of old faiths." The doubting intellect, act-
ing on the codes, produced the conception of justice-in-
itself, of merit as divorced from the effect of action on
others, the abstract idea of goodness.

The old philosopher, turning from this new concep-
tion to the Cosmos, found that incompatible with good-
ness. Suffering and sorrow, sunshine and rain, were
distributed independently of merit. With Greek and
Semite and Indian the conscience of man revolted
against the moral indifference of nature. Instead of
bringing in a verdict of guilty, they attempted reconcil-
iation in various ways. Indian speculation invented or
elaborated the theory of transmigration, in which the
Karma or soul-character passed from individual to

Value of Doubt 271

individual, the algebraic sums of happiness in the
whole chain being proportional to merit. The Stoics
were metaph5^sicians and imagined an immanent, om-
nipotent, and infinitely beneficent First Cause. Evil
was incompatible with this, and so they held, against
experience, that either it did not exist, or that it was
inflicted for our benefit or due to our fault. In one
fashion or another, all the great systems of thought had
recognised the antagonism and had attempted some
explanation of it. Huxley's view was that the modern
world with its new philosophy was only retreading the
toil-worn paths of the old. Scientific optimism was
being replaced by a frank pessimism. Cosmic evolu-
tion might be accountable for both good and evil, but
knowledge of it provided no better reason for choice of
the good than did earlier speculation. The cosmic
process was not only non-moral but immoral ; good-
ness did not lead to success in it, and laws and moral
precepts could only be addressed to the curbing of it.

In a sense these conclusions of Huxley seemed to
lead to absolute pessimism, but he offered some miti-
gating considerations. Society remains subject to the
cosmic process, but the less as civilisation advances
and ethical man is the more ready to combat it. The
history of civilisation shows that we have some hope
of this, for "when physiolog}^ psychology, ethics, and
political science, now befogged by crude anticipations
and futile analogies, have emerged from their child-
hood, they may work as much change on human
affairs as the earlier- ripened physical sciences wrought
on material progress." And so, remembering that the
evil cosmic nature in us has the foothold of millions of
years, and never hoping to abandon sorrow and pain,
we may yet, in the manhood of our race, accept our

2/2 ThoiiKis Henry lluxlcy

destiny, and, \vilh clear and steady eyes, address our-
selves to the task of living, that we ami others may
live better.

These gloomy views come from Huxley with such
weight and authority that even in a sketch of his life
and opinions it may be noticed that they do not seem
necessary deductions from the evolutionar}- conception
of the world. The first count adduced against the
cosmic process is its connection with suffering. It
may be doubted, so far as the animal world is con-
cerned, if Huxley has not exaggerated the gravity of
this. The two greatest contributors to the modern
conception of evolution are not in agreement with him.
Alfred Russel Wallace wrote :

" Ou the whole, then, we conclude that the popular idea of
the struggle for existence entailing misery and pain on the
animal world is the very reverse of the truth. What it really
brings about is the maximum of life and of the enjoyment of life
with the minimum of suffering and pain. Given the necessity
of death and reproduction — and without those there could
have been no progressive development of the animal world —
and it is difficult even to imagine a system by which a greater
balance of happiness could have been secured."

This view was evidently that also of Darwin himself, who
thus concluded his chapter on the struggle for exist-
ence : ' ' When we reflect on this struggle, we may
console ourselves with the full belief that the war of
nature is not incessant, that no fear is felt, that death
is generally prompt, and that the vigorous, the health}^
and the happy survive and multiply." As for man
himself, though it be true that in him the consum-
mation of pain is reached, still this is no isolated
fact of far-reaching ethical importance. It is in di-
rect dependence on the increa.sed physical and mental

Man Part of the Cosmos 273

development of man, and these are equally necessary
for and equally susceptible to increased pleasure and
increased happiness. It is not necessary to regard the
cosmic process as evil. Even when man, in various
ages, had elaborated the conception of abstract good-
ness, and had endeavoured to make his justice a doling
out of reward and punishment according to merit, it
was not inevitable to bring in a verdict of guilty against
the Cosmos. It is quite true that, in all the ages, man
has seen the sun shine on the unjust as on the just.
But it is an easy reflection that the world could not
turn round on individual merit, and if few are so guilty
as to deserve the agonies of grief that may come to all,
still fewer deserve some of the simpler and more com-
mon joys of life. The conception that w^as implicit in
tlie disciplines of the older philosophies is still open to
the philosophy of evolution. Behind it, as behind the
" self-hypnotised catalepsy of the devotee of Brahma,"
the Buddhist aspirations to Nirvana, the apathcia of the
Stoics, there may lie a recognition of the worthless-
ness of the individual : an equable acceptation of one's
self as part of a process : a triumph of intelligence over
selfishness. Finally, behind the sharp division made
between man and the Cosmos, there still lurks one of
the oldest and most enduring fallacies of the world,
a fallacy that Huxley hiuLself spent a great part of
his intellectual life in discovering and routing. The
fallacy is the conception of the Cosmos as something
separate and apart from man, as something through
which he, however briefly, passes. Thus Omar sang :

" Myself, when young, did eagerly frequent
Doctor and saint, and heard great argument
About it and about : but evermore

Came out by the same door where in I went.

18

2/4

Thomas Henry Huxley

" With them the seed of wisdom did I sow,
And with mine own hand wrought to make it grow ;

And this was all the Harvest that I reaped —
'I came like "Water, and like Wind I go.'

" Into this Universe, and IV/ty not knowing
Nor IVhcnce, like water willy-nilly flowing ;
And out of it, like Wind along the Waste
I know not Whither, willy-nilly blowing."

Btit, the more profoundly does the conception of evolu-
tion lay hold of human thought, the more inevitable it
becomes to recognise that man and all that is best in
man— his aspirations, ideas, virtues, and practical and
abstract justice and goodness— are just as much the
product of the cosmic process and part of the Cos-
mos as the most sinister results of the struggle for
existence.

CHAPTER XVII

CLOSING DAYS AND SUMMARY

Huxley's Life iu Londou — Decennial Periods — Ill-health — Re-
tirement to Eastbourne — Death — Personal Appearance —
Methods of Work — Personal Characteristics— An Inspirer
of Others — His Influence in Science — A Naturalist by
Vocation — His Aspirations.

HUXLEY'S life followed the quiet and even tenor of
that of a professional man of science and letters.
The great adventure in it was his j'outhful voj^age on
the Rattlesnake. That over, and his choice made in
favour of science as against medicine, he settled down
in Eondon. He married happily and shared in the
common joys and sorrows of domestic life. Advance-
ment came to him steadily, and, althottgh he was never
rich, after the first few years of life in London, his in-
come was always adequate to his moderate needs. For
the greater part of his working life, he lived actually in
London, in the ordinary style and with the ordinary
social enjoyments of a professional man. His duties in
connection with the Royal College of Science and with
the Geological Survey were not arduous but constant ;
his time was ftilly occupied with these, with his scien-
tific and literary work, with the business of scientific

275

276 Thomas Henry Huxley

societies, with the occasional obHgations of royal com-
missions, public boards, and lecturing engagements.
The quiet routine of his life was diversified by many
visits to provincial towns to deliver lectures or addresses,
by meetings of the British Association, by holidays in
vSwit/.crland, during which, with Tyndall, he made
special studies of the phenomena of glaciation, and in
the usual Continental resorts, and by several trips to
America.

In a rough-and-ready fashion, Huxley's active life
may be broken into a set of decennial periods, each
with tolerably distinctive characters. The first period,
roughly from 1850 to i860, was almost purely scientific.
It was occupied by his voyage, by his transition to science
as a career, his researches into the invertebrate forms of
life, the beginning of his palaeontological investiga-
tions, and a comparatively small amount of lecturing
and literary work. The second decennium still found
him employed chiefly in research, vertebrate and ex-
tinct forms absorbing most of his attention. He was
occupied actively with teaching, but the dominant
feature of the decennium was his assumption of the
Darwinian doctrines. In connection with these latter,
his literar}^ and lecturing work increased greatly, and
the side issues of what was, in itself, purely a scientific
controversy began to lead him into metaphysical and
religious studies. The third period, from 1870 to 1880,
was considerabl}' different in character. He had become
the most prominent man in biological science in Eng-
land, at a time when biological science was attracting
a quite unusual amount of scientific and public atten-
tion. Public honours and public duties, some of them
scientific, others general, began to crowd upon him,
and the time at his disposal for the quiet labours of

^A-^^'^^--— w'- <^ ■&%. ^^-W

/^

_^ ^(^i/. ^-CiT^ruJ

CARICATURE OF HUXLEY DRAWN BY HIMSELF
Reproduced by permission from Xattiral Science ^ vol. vii., No. 46

Ill-Health 277

investigation became rapidly more limited within this
period. He was secretary of the Royal Society, a
member of the London School Board, president of the
British Association, Lord Rector at several imiversities,
member of many royal commissions, government in-
spector of fisheries, president of the Geological Society.
In this multitude of duties it was natural that the
bulk of strictly scientific output was limited, but, on the
other hand, his literary output was much larger. Be-
tween 1880 and 1S90 he had reached the full maturity of
a splendid reputation, and honours and duties pressed
thick upon him. For part of the time he was presid-
ent of the Royal Society, the most distinguished posi-
tion to which a scientific man in England can attain,
and he was held by the general public at least in as high
esteem as by his scientific contemporaries. A small
amount of original scientific work still appeared from
his pen, but he was occupied chiefly with more general
contributions to thought.

Throughout his life, Huxlej' had never been robust.
From his youth upwards he had been troubled by dys-
pepsia with its usual accompaniment of occasional fits
of severe mental and physical depression. In 1872 he
was compelled to take a long holiday in Egypt, and,
although he returned to resume full labour, it is doubt-
ful if from that time onwards he recovered even the
strength normal to him. In 1885, his ill-health became
grave ; in the following years he had two attacks of
pleurisy, and symptoms of cardiac mischief became
pressing. He gradually withdrew from his official
posts, and, in 1890, retired to Eastbourne, where he
had built himself a house on the Downs. The more
healthy conditions and the comparative leisure he per-
mitted himself had a good effect, and he was able to

278 Thomas Henry Huxley

write some of his most brilliant essays and to make
a few public appearances : at Oxford in 1893, when he
delivered the Romanes lecture ; at the meeting of
the British Association in 1894, when he spoke on the
vote of thanks to the President, the Marquis of Salis-
bury ; at the Royal Society in the same year when he
received the recently established "Darwin Medal."
Early in the spring of 1895, ^^^ ^^ad a prostrating attack
of influenza, and from that time until his death on June
29, 1895, lis was an invalid. He was buried in the
Marylebone cemetery at Finchley, to the north of
lyondon.

Huxley was of middle stature and rather slender
build. His face, as Professor Ray Lankester described
it, was "grave, black-browed, and fiercely earnest."
His hair, plentiful and worn rather long, was black until
in old age it became silvery white. He wore short
side whiskers, but shaved the rest of his face, leaving
fully exposed an obstinate chin, and mobile lips, grim
and resolute in repose, but capable of relaxation into a
smile of almost feminine charm.

He was a very hard worker and took little exercise.
Professor Howes describes a typical day as occupied by
lecture and laboratory work at the College of Science
until his hurried luncheon ; then a cab-drive to the
Home Office for his work as Inspector of Fisheries ;
then a cab home for an hour's work before dinner, and
the evening after dinner spent in literary work or scien-
tific reading. While at work, his whole attention was
engrossed, and he disliked being disturbed. This ab-
straction of his attention is illustrated humorously by
a story told by one of his demonstrators. Huxle}' was
engaged in the investigations required for his book on
the Cravfish, and his demonstrator came in to ask a

Methods of Work 279

question about a codfish. " Codfish? " said Huxley ;
" that 's a vertebrate, is n't it ? Ask nie in a fortnight
and I '11 consider it. ' ' While at work he smoked almost
continuousl)^ and from time to time he took a little
relaxation, for the strains of a fiddle were occasionalh'
heard from his room. Indeed he was devoted to music,
regarding it as one of the highest of the aesthetic pleas-
ures. He tells us himself :

"When I was a boy, I was very fond of music, and I am so
now ; and it so happened that I had the opportunity of hearing
much good music. Among other tilings, I had abundant op-
portunities of hearing that great old master, Sebastian Bach.
I remember perfectly well — although I knew nothing about
music then, and, I may add, know nothing whatever about it
now — the intense satisfaction and delight which I had in listen-
ing, by the hour together, to Bach's fugues. It is a pleasure
which remains with me, I am glad to think ; but, of late years,
I have tried to find out the why and wherefore, and it has often
occurred to me that the pleasure derived from musical com-
positions of this kind is essentially of the same nature as that
which is derived from pursuits which are commonly regarded
as purely intellectual. I mean, that the source of pleasure is
exactly the same as in most of my problems in morpholog}' —
that you have the theme in one of the old masters' works fol-
lowed out in all its endless variations, always appearing and
always reminding j'ou of unity in variety."

He had a hot temper, and did not readily brook op-
position, especially when that seemed to him to be the
result of stupidity or of prejudice rather than of reason,
and his own reason was of a very clear, decided, and
exact order. He had little sympathy with vacillation
of any kind, whether it arose from mere infirmity of
purpose or from the temperament which delights in
balancing opposing considerations. He said on one
occasion :

2 So Thomas Henry Huxley

"A great lawyer-statesman and philosopher of a former
age — I mean Francis Bacon — said that truth came out of error
much more rapidly than out of confusion. There is a wonder-
ful truth in that saying. Next to being right in this world, the
best of all things is to be clearly and definitely wrong, because
you will come out somewhere. If you go buzzing about be-
tween right and wrong, vibrating and fluctuating, you come
out nowhere ; but if you are absolutely and thoroughly and
persistently wrong, you must, some of these days, have the ex-
treme good fortune of knocking your head against a fact, and
that sets you all straight again. So I will not trouble myself as
to whether I may be right or wrong in what I am about to say,
but at any rate I hope to be clear and definite ; and then you
will be able to judge for yourselves whether, iu following out
the train of thought I have to introduce, you knock your heads
against facts or not."

The particular suggestions to which these remarks
were the characteristic introduction related to definite
problems of education, that is to sa}', to questions upon
which some action was urgent. It was in all cases
of life, in science or affairs, that Huxley was resoltite
for clear ideas and definite courses of conduct. As a
matter of fact, no one ever took greater care to satisfy
himself as best he could as to what was right and what
was wrong ; but where action rather than reflection
was needed, then his principle was to act, and to know
definitely and clearly why you acted and for what j'oti
acted. In matters of opinion, on the other hand, he
was all for not coming to a definite opinion when the
facts obtainable did not justif}^ such an opinion. In
thought, agnosticism, the refusal to accept any ideas
or principles except on sufficient evidence ; in action,
po.sitivism, to act promptly in definite and known
directions for definite and known objects : these were
his principles.

Personal Characteristics 281

Another aspect of the same trait of character, he
shewed in an address to medical students at a distribu-
tion of prizes. After congratulating the victors he
confessed to "an undercurrent of S3'mpathy for those
who have not been successful, for those valiant knights
who have been overthrown in their tourney, and have
not made their appearance in public." After recount-
ing an early failure of his own, he proceeded :

" I said to myself, ' Never rniud ; what 's the next thing to he
done? ' Aud I fouud that pohcy of ' uever minding ' and go-
ing on to the next thing to be done, to be the most important
of all policies in the conduct of practical life. It does not mat-
ter how many tumbles you have in this life, so long as you do
not get dirty when you tumble ; it is only the people who have
to stop to be washed and made clean, who must necessarily
lose the race. You learn that which is of inestimable import-
ance— that there are a great many people in the world who are
just as clever as you are. You learn to put your trust, by and
by, in an economy and frugality of the exercise of your powers
both moral and intellectual ; and you very soon find out, if you
have not found it out before, that patience and tenacity of pur-
pose are worth more than twice their weight of cleverness."

All Huxley's work was marked by a quality which
may be called conscientiousness or thoroughness. Look-
ing through his memoirs, written mail)- years ago, the
subjects of which have since been handled and re-
handled by other writers with new knowledge and
with new methods at their disposal, one is struck that
all the observations he made have stood their groimd.
With new facts new generalisations have often been
reached, and some of the positions occupied by Httxley
have been turned. But what he saw and described
had not to be redescribed ; the citations he made from
the older authorities were always so chosen as to

282 Thomas Henry Huxley

contain the exact gist of the writers. These qualities,
admirable in scientific work, became at once admirable
and terrible in his controversial writings. His own ex-
actness made him ruthless in exposing any inexactness
in his adversaries, and there were few disputants who
left an argument with Huxle}- in an undamaged condi-
tion. The consciousness which he had of his own care-
ful methods, added to a natural pugnacit}-, gave him an
intellectual courage of a very high order. As he knew
himself to have made sure of his premisses, he did not
care whither his conclusions might lead him, against
whatsoever established doctrine or accepted axiom.

There was, however, a strong spice of natural com-
bativeness in his nature, the direct result of his native
and highly trained critical faculty. He tells us that in
the pre-Darwinian days he was accustomed to defend
the fixity of species in the company of evolutionists
and in the presence of the orthodox to attack the same
doctrine. Later in life, when evolution had become
fashionable, and the principles of Darwinism were be-
ing elevated into a new dogmatism, he was as read}-
to criticise the loose adherents of his own views as he
had been to expose the weakness of the conventional
dogmatists.

Perhaps the most striking feature of Huxley's work
as a whole was its infectious nature. His vigorous
and decided personality was reflected on all the sub-
jects to which he gave attention, and in the same
fashion as his presence infected persons with a personal
enthusiasm so his writings stimulated readers to efforts
along the same lines. His great influence is clear
in the number and distinction of the biologists who
came under his personal care, and in the great army of
writers and thinkers who have been inspired by his

Critical Mind 28

J

views and methods on general questions. His position
as an actual contributor to science has to a certain ex-
tent been lost sight of for two reasons. In the first
place, his eSect on the world as an expositor of the
scientific method in its general application to life has
overshadowed his exact work ; in the second place, his
exact work itself has been partly lost sight of in the
new discoveries and advances to which it gave rise. It
is therefore necessary to reiterate that, apart from all
his other successes, he had made for himself an ex-
tremeh' distinguished position in the annals of exact
science. Sir Michael Foster and Prof. Ray Lankes-
ter, in their preface to the collected edition of his
scientific memoirs, make a just claim for him. These
memoirs, they wrote, show that, " apart from the influ-
ence exerted b}^ his popular writings, the progress of
biology during the present century was largely due to
labours of his of which the general public knew no-
thing, and that he was in some respects the most original
and most fertile in discovery of all his fellow workers
in the same branch of science."

There can be little question that it was no acci-
dent that determined the direction of Huxley's career.
He was a naturalist by inborn vocation. The contrast
between a natural bent and an acquired habit of life
was well seen in the case of Huxley and Macgillivray,
his companion on the Rattlesnake. The former was
appointed as a surgeon, and it was no part of his duties
to busy himself with the creatures of the sea ; and yet
his observations on them made a .series of real contribu-
tions to biological .science and laid the sure foundation
of a world-wide and enduring reputation. The latter
was the son of a naturalist, a naturalist by profession,
and appointed to the expedition as its official natural-

284 Thomas Henry Huxley

ist ; and yet he made oul}' a few observations and a
limited collection of curiosities, and even his exiguous
place in the annals of zoolog}- is the accidental result
of his companionship with Huxley. The special nat-
tural endowments whicli Huxley brought to the study
of zoology were, in the first place, a facult}' for the pa-
tient and assiduous observation of facts ; in the second,
a swift power of discriminating between the essential
and the accessory among facts ; in the third, the con-
structive ability to arrange these essentials in wide gen-
eralisations which we call laws or principles and which,
within the limits necessarily set by inductive princi-
ples, are the starting-point for new deductions. These
were the faculties which he brought to his science, but
there were added to them two personal characteristics
without which they would not have taken him far.
They were impelled by a driving force which dis-
tinguishes the successful man from the muddler and
without which the finest mental powers are as useless
as a complicated machine disconnected from its driving-
wheel. They were directed by a lofty and disinter-
ested enthusiasm, without which the most talented
man is a mere self-seeker, useless or dangerous to
societ}'. The faculties and qualities which made Hux-
ley great as a zoologist were practically those which
he applied to the general questions of biological theory,
to the problems of education and of society, and to
philosophy and metaphysics. A comparison between
his sane and forcible handling of questions that lay
outside the special province to which the greater part
of his life was devoted, with the dubious and involved
treatment given such questions by the professional
politicians to whom the English races tend to entrust
their de.stinies, is a useful comment on that value of

His Aspirations 285

science as discipline to which Huxley so strenuously
called attention.

There can be no better way of ending this sketch of
Huxley's life and work than by quoting his own ac-
count of the objects to which he had devoted himself
consciously. These were :

" To promote the increase of natural knowledge and to for-
ward the application of scientific methods of investigation to
all the problems of life to the best of my ability, in the convic-
tion which has grown with my growth and strengthened with my
strength, that there is no alleviation for the sufferings of man-
kind except veracity of thought and of action, and the resolute
facing of the world as it is when the garment of make-believe by
which pious hands have hidden its uglier features is stripped off.

"It is with this intent that I have subordinated any reason-
able or unreasonable ambition for scientific fame which I may
have permitted myself to entertain to other ends ; to the popular-
isation of science ; to the development and organisation of sci-
entific education ; to the endless series of battles and skirmishes
over evolution ; and to untiring opposition to that ecclesiastical
spirit, that clericalism, which in England, as everywhere else,
and to whatever denomination it may belong, is the deadly
enemy of science.

" In striving for the attainment of these objects, I have been
but one among many, and I shall be well content to be remem-
bered, or even not remembered, as such. Circumstances, among
which I am proud to reckon the devoted kindness of many
friends, have led to my occupation of various prominent posi-
tions, among which the presidency of the Royal Society is the
highest. It would be mock modesty on my part, with these
and other scientific honours which have been bestowed upon
me, to pretend that I have not succeeded in the career which I
have followed, rather because I was driven into it than of my
own free will ; but I am afraid I should not count even these
things as marks of success if I could not hope that I had not
somewhat helped that movement of opinion which has been
called the New Reformation."

INDEX

Adams, 209
Admiralty, 14, 48, 49
Agassiz, 68, 91, 99
Age of the earth, 84, 85
Agnosticism, 239, 241-243, 279
Ahriman, 265
Alchemists, 256, 257
Alternation of generations, 53,

54
Ameghino, 141
America, 70
American addresses, 71
American fossils, 75
American monkeys, 163
Amphibia, 143
Amphioxus, 22, 134
Anatomy of man and ape,

161
Anchitherium, 70, 74, 76
Animal kingdom, old views

of, 35
Animals and plants, 97
Anthracosaurus, 69
Anthropomorphism, 250
Anthropoid apes, 149-153
"Ape and Tiger" methods,

265
Appendicularia, 56, 57
Apprenticeship in medicine,

183
Archaeopteryx, 136
Archetype of molluscs, 58, 59,

61

Archetype of Vertebrata, Ar-

ticulata, and Radiata, 62
Arctogoea, 140
Argyll, Duke of, 24S
Aristotle, 100, 259
Arnold, Matthew, 185
Articulata of Cuvier, 38
Ascaris, egg of, 176
Ascidians, 55-57, 96
Australia and South America,

land connection, 141
Authority, 175, 231, 232, 241
Authority and investigation,

179
Authority and knowledge,

104, 105
Axioms, 240

B

Bach, Sebastian, 278
Balfour, F. M., 135
Barrier Reef of Australia, 20
Basi-cranium of vertebrates,

132
Beagle, voyage of, 28
Beelzebub, 238
Belief, duty of, 238, 239
Belief, nature of scientific, 228
Beneden, van, 59, 176
Berkeley, Bishop, 218, 221, 224
Berkeley, quotation from, 221
Bible, 189, 192, 194, 213, 235,

237, 244, 245, 247, 248, 250,

253. 254, 259

287

2 88

Index

Bible and cjeology, So

Bibliolatry, 235, 246

Biniana, 164

Biology and medical educa-
tion, 1S4

Birds, ancestry of, 69

Birds, classification of, 135

Birmingham, 185

Bishop, 175

Bishop Berkeley, 218, 221, 224

Bishop of Norwich, 33

Bishop of Oxford, see Wilber-
force

Boards for elemeutarv educa-
tion, 188

Bojanus, 173

Bones of horse, 71, 72

Bones, cartilage, and mem-
brane, 134

Books, value of, 175

Booth, "General," 213

Bourbon, 246

Brahma, 272

Brain of man and apes, 120,
145, 146, 162, 163

Brain and mind, 220, 221

Brain-weights, 164

Breathing, 168

Breeding, selective, 127

Brehm, 153

British Association, 68, 120,
125, 274

Brooks, Professor W. K., 94

Buckland, Professor, 80, 234

Buddhists, i, 272

Buffon, 15, 90

Burnett, Sir William, 11, 46

Busk, George, 49

Cabanis, 228
C^sar, 265

Cana, miracle at, 257
Cape York, 25
Carinates, 137
Carlyle, Thomas, iti
Cartesian axiom, 222
Cartilage bones, 134

Cartilaginous skulls, 134
Catastrophism in geology, 80,

249
Catholicism, J23, 214, 247
Cells, 52, 53

Cephalous molluscs, 58, 59
Chalk, 266

Challenger expedition, 15
Chalmers, Dr. Thomas, 80
Chambers, R., 62
Chamisso, 53, 56
Chance, 229

Change in universe, 249
Charing Cross Hospital, 8, 9
Chaucer, 213

Chemistry and alchemy, 257
Chess, life compared with, 169
Children, education of, 189
Chimpanzees, 149, 163
Chondrocranium, 134
Christianity and evolution,

122
Christian civilisation and au-
thority, 232
Chronology of the Bible, 247
Church of England, iii, 112
Church, the, and science, 236
Classical education, 185, 210
Classification of birds, 135
Classification by Cuvier, 38
Classification by Linnaeus, 38
Classification of mammals, 142
Classification of man, 146
Classification by old authors,

37
Classification of vertebrates.

Clergy as critics of science, 236

Clericalism, 239, 284

Clodd, E., 90, 127

Coelenterata, 42, 96

Coelomata, 43, 44

Commissions, royal, 195, 204

Common sense and meta-
physics, 218

Common sense and science,
209

Conduct and religion, 261

Congo, 149

Index

289

Conscience, 269
Couscieutiousness, 280
Consciousness, 220, 224
Contemporaneity, geological,

79
Continuity of nature, 255
Cookery in schools, 190
Cope, Professor, 69, 94
Corals of Barrier Reef, 20
" Corybantic Christianity, "

215.

Cosmic process, 268, 270, 271

Cosmogony of the Hebrews,
244, 246

Cosmos, 229, 263, 265, 267, 272

Cowper-Temple Clause, 188

Crayfish, 158, 173, 277

Creation, 139, 246, 252

Creator, the, 250

Credibility of authority, 232

Criticism, Biblical, 194

Criticism of life, 1S5

Croonian lectures, 65, 129

Ctenophora, 42

Culture and science, 1S5, 186

Curriculum of medical educa-
tion, 184

Cuttle-fish, 58

Cuvier, 6, 38, 115, 132, 133,
136, 209, 211

D

Darwin, Charles, 27-29, 60, 61,
68, chapters viii. and ix.,
138, 147, 166, 229, 242

Darwin medal, 108

Darwin, voyage of, 27, 28

Darwin, Erasmus, 90

Darwinism, 103, 104, 106, 123

Darwinism, Huxley's late and
early opinions on, 106-109

Darwinism and Lamarckism,

94
"Days" of creation, 251, 252
De la Beche, Sir Henry, 63, 64
Deluge, the, 235
Descartes, 219, 240, 243
Design, argument from, 230
19

Despotism and the Bible, 245
Devonian fishes, 68
Deuteronomy, 245
Dinosaurs and the ancestry of

birds, 69
Diprotodonts, 142
Dissection in laboratories, i8r
Divine will and science, 233
Doctrine of the Deluge, 235
Dogma and literature in the

Bible, 254
Doliolum, 56
Domestic economy, 190
Doubt, duty of, 232, 239, 269
Drawing for children, 193
Dredging, 22
Drill for children, 189
Durckheim, Strauss, 173

E

Earth, age of, 84, 85
Eastbourne, 277
Ecclesiasticism, 235, 239
Echidna, 156
Economy, domestic, 190
Edinburgh, 174
Edinburgh Revieiv, 115, 116
Education, classical, 185, 210
Education of children, 170
Education, elementary, 187,

188
Education, general, 184
Education, liberal, 169, 1S6,

210
Education, medical, 181
Education and religion, 188
Education, scientific, 168
Education of teachers, 195
Education, university, 195
Eggs of Mammalia, 156
Egypt, 276
Ejects, 221

Elementary education, 188
Elementary lessons in physi-
ology, 172
Embryology and zoology, 177
Embryology of brain and
skull, 130-133

290

Index

Embryology of Mammals, 156,

157"

Embryology of man, 159

Embrj'os, marine, 176

Embryos of vertebrates, 157

Endostyle of Ascidians, 56

England in eighteenth cent-
ury, 239

English Bible, 245

English men of letters, 218

English philosophers, 218

Eohippus, 78

Erdkiiiide, 170, 171

Error, 243

Established church and Edu-
cation, 189

Ether, 219

Ethics and evolution, 263

Ethical process, 265

Eutheria, 142

Evidence, limitations of, 231

Evidence for miraculous, 258

Evil, 268, 269, 271

Evolution, 60, 62, 63, 108, no,
122, 168, 248

Evolution and Christianity,
122

Evolution of Cosmos, 250-253

Evolution not an explanation
of Cosmos, 229

Evolution and Darwinism,

94

Evolution before Darwin, 91,
93, 100

Evolution, Darwin's contri-
bution to, 93, 104

Evolution and ethics, 263

Evolution of horse, 73

Evolution and natural selec-
tion, 124-127

Evolution and pain, 268

Evolution, philosophy of,
272

Evolution and palaeontology,
86, 87

Evolution and Theism, 244

Evolutionist, 281

Exposition, Huxley's method
of, 208

Faith, agnostic, 243
Falkenstein, 153
Fayrer, Sir Joseph, 10, 11
Feet of anthropoids, 164
Fertility of artificial breeds,

127
Fiddle, 278

Fisgard, H. M. S., 46
Fish, fossil, 68
Fisheries, Inspector of, 277
Flower, Sir William, 146
Forbes, Edward, 47, 63
Foreign languages, 196, 213
Fontis of Animal Life, 178
Fossils, 67, 68

Fossils, chronological arrange-
ment of, 87
Fossils and evolution, 87
Foundation membranes of

Medusae, 40-43
Foster, Sir Michael, 47, 64,

180, 283
Freedom of the Press, 240
Freedom of thought, 231, 233
French, 213

French Revolution, iii
French translations, 216
Fuller i an Professor, 64
Function, changes in, 230

Galileo, 247

Gallinaceous birds, 139

Gambit, 169

Game of life, 170

Garden, as an instance of in-
terference with cosmic pro-
cess, 267

Gamier, 151

Gasteropoda, 58

Gegenbauer, 59

Genesis, 234, 248, 250, 251, 252

Geographical distribution,

137-14^
Geological addresses, 79, 80

Geological club, 234

Index

291

Geological contemporaneity,

79

Geological historj-, 249

Geological Society of London,
70, 78, 80, 86

Geological time, 84, 85

Geology and the Bible, 80

Geology and catastrophism,
80, 81

Geology compared with bi-
ology, 82

Geology, history of, 234

German, 213

Gibbons, 149

Girls, education of, 190

Glacial acetic acid, 176

Gladstone, W. E., 248, 250,
251, 263

Goethe, 99, 130, 132

Goethe, quotations from, 130

Gold, transmutation of, 256

Goodness, 269, 273

Gorilla, 87, 149, 161

Gospels, 254

Gosse, P. H., 118

Government, 239

Greek, 213; in education, 186

Greek ethics, 269

Groos, Prof., 154

H

Haeckel, Prof. E., 91, 136
Hands of Anthropoids, 164
Haslar Hospital, 11, 12
Heathorn, Miss H. A., 19
Hebrew Cosmogony, 246
Hebrew Morality, 259
Hebrew Scriptures, 250
Heine, 261
Henle and Meissner, reports

of, 182
Hercules, 246
Hertwig, 134
Hindustan, 269
Hipparion, 74-76
Hippocampus minor, 162, 163
Histological methods, 177
Hobbes, 218

Home office, 277

Homo, classification of, 160

Homology in organs of Medu-
sas, 123

Homotaxis in geology, 80

Hooker, Sir Joseph Dalton, 47,
98, lOI

Horse, 68-78, 174

Hospitals in London, 181

Howes, Professor G. B., 173,
174, 207, 277

Humboldt, 92

Hume, David, 217, 218, 223,
240, 255, 256

Hume, David, quotations
from, 223, 241, 256

Humour, 209

Hunterian Professor, 129

Hutton, James, 8t, 249

Huxley, birth, 2 ; parents, 2,
3 ; school, 4 ; apprenticed
to medicine, 5 ; enters Char-
ing Cross Hospital, 8; first
original paper, 9 ; graduates
at London University, 10 ;
becomes M. R. C. S., 11;
appointed to Haslar Hos-
pital, II ; appointed ioRat-
tlesfiake, 12 ; meets his
future wife at Sydney, 19 ;
first paper to Royal Society,
33 ; Royal medals, 34 ; be-
comes F. R. S., 47 ; leaves
naval service, 48 ; appointed
to Geological Survey and
School of Mines, 63 ; be-
comes Fullerian Professor,

64 ; marriage, 64 ; examiner,

65 ; Croonian lecturer, 66 ;
visits America, 70 ; becomes
Secretary and President of
Geological Society, 78 ; ac-
cepts Darwinism, loi ; re-
ceives Darwin medal, 108 ;
becomes Hunterian Profes-
sor, 129; starts laboratory
courses at South Kensing-
ton, 180 ; becomes candidate
for London School Board,

292

Index

Huxley — ConVd.

1S9; serves oil Royal Com-
missions, 196, 204 ; becomes
member of Her Majesty's
Privy Council, 205 ; mar-
rias^e, 274 ; ill-health and
retirement, 276 ; death, 277 ;
personal appearance, 277

Huxley's layer in root-sheath
of hairs, 10

Hydra, 50

Hypothesis as to History of
Nature, 248, 249

Ichthyopsida, 143
Idealism, 220, 224
Ideals and culture, 186
Indian speculation, 269
Individuality of animals, 49,

50, 51, 52, 55
Infallibility, 123, 236
Inspiration, 246, 247, 253, 254
Instincts, 154
Intellect, 243
Intermediate and linear tvpes,

International Scientific Scries,

173
Invertcbrata, Manual of, 175
Ionia, 169
Israel, 245

Jermyn Street lectures to

working men, 207
Johnson, Samuel, 219
Judaism and science, 246
Justice, 265, 269, 271, 273

K

Kant, 84, 242, 262
Karma, 269
Kelvin, Lord, 84
Knowledge and authority, 104,
105

Kolliker, 49, 59
Kowalevsky, 57

Laboratory work, 177, 179,

180
Ivab5'rinthodonts, 69
Lamarck, 90, 91, 97
Lamarckism and Darwinism,

94, 97
Languages, modern, 6, 7
Lankester, Professor E. Rav,

57, 60, 94, 180, 277, 282
Larvae, 15S
Latin, 186, 213

Law-courts and evidence, 231
Lawrence, Sir W., 144
Lectures at the School of

Mines, 180
Lemurs, 163
Leutemann, 153
Leverrier, 209
Leviticus, 245
Liberal education, 228
Life, origin of, 227, 228
Limbs of Man and Gorilla,

162
Linear and intermediate tvpes,

87
Linnsean Society of London,

33, 49, 115, 138, 145
Linnaeus, 38, 234
Literary culture, 186
Literary Gazette, 48
Literary style, 211, 212, 213,

214, 215
Literature, the Bible as, 254
Liverpool, 169
Living bodies, nature of, 228
Locke, 224

Lockyer, Sir Norman, 211
London, medical education in,

181
London, school board of, 189
Loyola, 262
Loxomma, 69
Lucas, Mr., 113
Luther, 262

Index

29:

I/yell, Sir Charles, 81, 91, 98,

144, 234, 249
Lyonet, 173

M

MacGillivray, John, 16, 17,

282
MacGillivray, William, 16,

100
Macmillan and Co., 171
Magna Charta, the Bible as,

245
Mammalia, classification of,

142
Man and the Apes, 155
Man, classification of, 146
Man and Gorilla, 161
Man, origin of, 144
Man and the Apes, 165
Man's Place iti Nature, 147,

148
Manes and Manicheisra, 265
Mantle of molluscs, 58
Manual of tlie Anatomy of In-

verlibrated Animals, 175
Manual of the Anatomy of

Vertebrated Ani)iials, 175
Marine embryos, 176
Marmosets, 163
Marriage, 19, 274
Marsh, Professor, 70-78
Marsupials, 141
Mason, Sir Josiah, 185
Materialism, 217, 220, 222, 225,

227
Matter and ideas, 224
Matter, nature of, 219-221
Matthew, Patrick, 100
Mauritius, 18
Medical education, 167, 181,

184
Medical students, i8r, 279
Medusie, 33, 39, 40, 41, 42, 96,

123
Membrane bones, 134
Mental capacity of apes, 152
Mercy, 265
Mertens, 56

Mesohippus, 77

Metals, transmutation of 257

Metaphysics, 241

Metaphysics and science, 217

Metatheria, 142

IMethods in histology, 177

Microscope, 32, 176

Microtomes, 177

Milton, 213

Mind and body, 220

Mind, growth of, 210

Miohippus, 76

Miracles, 246, 254-259

Missionary spirit, 262

Mitral valve, 175

Mivart, Dr. St. George, 246-248

Modern spirit, 241

Modification of species, 92

Mollusca, 56, 58, 59, 60, 61, 96

Morality and religion, 237,

238
Morality of Stoics, 238
Morley, John, 217, 260
Mosaic Deluge, 235
Moseley, Professor H. N., 15
Mucous layer of germ, 43
Muller, Johannes, 6, 37, 56
Music, 278

N

Naples, International Zoolog-
ical Station at, 176

Naturalism, 226

Natural selection, 94, 99, 100,
103, 105, 124-127

Nature, continuity of 255

Nature, historj- of, 248

Nature, state of, 266

Nature, 211

Naval Architecture afid Thn-
ber, 100

Nebular hypothesis, 230

Newman, Cardinal, 240

New Testament, 253, 254

Nirvana, 272

Noah's Deluge, 235

Notochord, 134

Notogoea, 140

294

Index

o

Oken, 130, 132, 133

Old Teslaiiienl, 90

Omar, 272

Optimism, 270

Oraugs, 149 „

Order of nature, 255, 25b

OrKanic versus Inorganic, 229

Organon, 242

Origin of species, 89, 95, loi,

102, no
On^hi of Species, reviews of,

113^114, 115, 146
Orinuzd, 265
Ornithology, 136
Ornitborbynchus, 156
Oruitboscelida, 69
Orobippus, 77
Orthodoxy, 246
Owen, Sir Ricbard, 65, 66, 115,
118-121, 131, 133. ^36, 145.
146, 162
Oxford, 120, 125, 263, 264
Oxford, Bisbop of, see Wilber-
force

Pain, 26S, 270, 271
Pakeontology and evolution,

68, 86
Paliieotberium, 74
Paley, 230

T^ciSC3.1 122

Payment of teachers by re-
sults, 195
Pelagic life, 30, 31
Pelvis of man and gorilla, 161
Pentateuch, 234, 244
Pessimism, 270
Phillips, Professor, 69
Philosophie Zoologique, 97, 9S
Philosophy, Huxley's advice

on, 218
Phosphorescence, 55
Physical education, 189
Physical geography, 170
Physics of Aristotle, 100

Physiography, 171
Physiology, 172

Pigafetta,'i49

Pigmies, 149

Pioneers of Evolution, 127

Plankton, 30, 31

Plato's Archetypes, 59

Plato's philosophy, 224

Pliohippus, 76

" Portuguese man-of-war," 41,

Possibilities in logic, 258
Poulton, Professor E. B., 109,

127
Praver, efficacy of, 258
Priestley, Joseph, 239
Primers of science, 171
Primitive groove, 135
Principles of Geology, 234
Professional education, 183
Protestantism, 123, 233, 235,

236
Protestant churches and

knowledge, 247
Protestants and the Bible, 247
Protohippus, 74
Protoplasm, 52, 228
Prototheria, 142
Psychology, 227
Pterodactyls, 69
Pteropods, 56
Pyrosoma, 55

Q

Quarterly Journal of Micro-
scopical Science, 49
Quarterly Review, 115- 116,

'" R

Rabbinical maxim of inspira-
tion, 247

Radiata of Cuvier, 3b

Rathke, 65

Ratites, 137

Rattlesnake, H. M. S., 13. 20,
21, 46, 282

Reade lecture, 146

Index

295

Reason, age of, 239
Reformation, New, 2S4
Reformation, Protestant, 122,

233
Religion in education, 188,

Religion and morality, 237,

238
Religion and science, 120, 259
Religion, teaching, 191
Results, payment by, 195
Retina and light, 219
Revelation, 260
Revolution, French, iii
Richardson, Sir John, 12
Rights of man, 245
Robertson, Charles, 179
Rollestou, Professor, 152, 153,

266
Romanes, Professor, 152, 153,

263
Romanes lecture, 263
Rome, 247

Roscoe, Professor, 171
Rosse, Earl of, 34
Royal College of Science, 176,

180, 204, 274, 277
Royal College of Surgeons, it,

129, 132
Royal Commissions, 204, 274
Royal Institution, 49, 52, 62, 64
Royal Society, ^t,, 34, 47, 49,

53, 58, 108. 129, 276
Rutherford, Professor, 180

Salisbury, Marquis of, 125
"Sally," the chimpanzee, 153
Salps, 50, 53, 54, 55, 96
Salt, Dr., 5
vSauropsida, 143
Saururse, 136
Savages, 23, 24, 165
Sawyer, Bob, 184
Scepticism, 240
vSchematic mollusc, 60
School boards, 188, 189
School of Mines, r8o

Schwann, 52

.Science and Art Department,

195
Science and culture, 185
Science and Judaism, 246
Science and medical educa-
tion, 184
Science and metaphysics, 217
Science and religion, 259
Science and the Christian Tra-
dition, 248
Science and the Hebrew Tra-

ditiofi, 248
Science primers, 171
Scientific education, 168
Sclater, P. L., 138, 139, 142
Scottish universities, 167
Scriptures, 246
Section-cutting, 177
Secular education, 191, 194
Sedgwick, Professor Adam,

80, 115
Segmentation of eggs, 157
Segmentation of skull, J33
Selection and education, 190
{Selective breeding, 103
Semite, ethics of, 269
Septuagint, 251
Serous layer of germ, 43
Sheldonian theatre, 264
Singing for children, 193
Skepsis, thatige, of Goethe, 99
Skull of vertebrates, 65, 129,

130, 131, 132
Socrates, 243
Southern hemisphere, former

land in, 141
Speaking, public, 208
Species, 92, 98, ic6, 107, 108,

125, 126, 127
Specialists as teachers, 182
Spencer, Herbert, 91, 94, 123
Sponges, 42
Spontaneity of living matter,

228
Stanley, Captain Owen, 12, 13
State of nature, 266
Stevenson, R. L., quotation
from, 174

296

Index

Stewart, Professor Balfour,

171
Stoic morality, 192, 23S
Stoics, 238, 269, 272
Stru,y;gle for existence, 93, 94-

95', 104, 266, 267, 271
Style, analysis of, 21 1, 212
Suarez, Father, 214
Substance of mind and matter,

223
Supernaluralism, 226
Superstition, 242
Survival of the fittest, 93, 94,

104
Suspensoria of jaws, 133
Switzerland, 275
Sydney, 19, 32
Synoptic Gospels, 254

Tapirs, 78

Teachers, education of, 195

Teeth of anthropoids, 149

Teeth of the horse, 73

Teleology, 230

Temper, 27S

Theism and evolution, 244

Theology, 259

Theology in education, 191

Theoretical work in medical

education, 184
Thomas, Oldfield, 142
Thomson, Sir \V., now Lord

Kelvin, q. v.
Thread-cells of Medusse, 41
Time required for evolution,

84, 85
Times, the London, 66, 108,

Todd and Bowman's Cyclopae-
dia of Anatomy, 49
Toronto, University of, 48
Tow-net material, 31
Transmigration, 269
Transmutation of species, 99
Treatise on Human Nature,

240
Tree of evolution, 35

Tyudall, Professor John, 47,

48. 275

Types, 36, 96, 166

Types for laboratory dissec-
tion, 178, 180, t8i

Types, intermediate and lin-
ear, 165

U

Uniformitariauism in geol-
ogy, 81, 240
University education, 195
University of London, 65
University of Toronto, 48

V

Variation in anatomy, 166
Verification, method of, 179
Vertebrae, structure of, 131
Vertebral theory of the skull,

129-132
Vertebrata, 128
Vertebrata, ancestors of, 57
Vertebrata, classification of,

43
Vertebrata, embryos ol, 157

Vestiges of Creation, 63, 97

Vivisection, 205

Voltaire, 260

Von Baer, 37, 43, 62, 96

Voyage of Beagle, 28

Voyage of Challenger, 15

\oyagQ oi Rattlesnake, 20, 21

W

Wallace, Alfred Russel, 95,

loi, 271
Weight of brains, 164
Weismann, Professor A., 94
Wells, W. C, 100
Westminster Revieiv, 107,

114
Wharton Jones, Dr., 9, 37
Whewell, 115
Wilberforce, Samuel, Bishop

of Oxford, 115, 116, 117.

118, 120, 121

Index

297

Willey, Arthur, 57

Wine miracle at Cana, 257

Wollastou, 98

Words, use of, 213, 214

Workmen, lectures to, 207

York, Archbishop of, 234

Zoological Society, 138
Zoological science and labora-
tories, 177
Zoologist, Huxley as a, 283
Zoology, 173
Zoophytes, 40

Heroes of the Nations.

EDITED BY

EVELYN ABBOTT, M.A.,

Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford.

A Serfes of biographical studies of the lives and work
of a number of representative historical characters about
whom have gathered the great traditions of the Nations
to which they belonged, and who have been accepted, in
many instances, as types of the several National ideals
With the life of each typical character will be presented
a picture of the National conditions surrounding him
during his career.

The narratives are the work of writers who are recog-
nized authorities on their several subjects, and, while
thoroughly trustworthy as history will present picturesque
and dramatic " stories " of the Men and of the events con-
nected with them.

To the Life of each " Hero " will be given one duo-
decimo volume, handsomely printed in large type, pro-
vided with maps and adequately illustrated according to
the special requirements of the several subjects. The
volumes will be sold separately as follows :

Cloth extra ^^

Roxburgh, uncut edges, gilt top . . . . 5^

HEROES OF THE NATIONS.

A series of biographical studies of the lives and work of
certain representative historical characters, about whom have
gathered the great traditions of the Nations to which they
belonged, and who have been accepted, in many instances, as
types of the several National ideals.

The volumes will be sold separately as follows : cloth extra,
5^. ; Roxburgh, uncut edges, gilt top, 6^.

The following are now ready :

NELSON. By W. Clark Russell.
GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS. By C,

R. L. Fletcher.
PERICLES. By Evelyn Abbott.
THEODORIC THE GOTH. By

Thomas Hodgkin.
SIR PHILIP SIDNEY. By. H. R.

Fox-Bourne.
JULIUS CiESAR. By W. Warde

Fowler.
WYCLIF. By Lewis Sergeant.
NAPOLEON. By W. O'Connor Mor-
ris.
HENRY OF NAVARRE. By P. F.

Willert.
CICERO. By J. L. Strachan-David-

son.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN. By Noah

Brooks.

PRINCE HENRY (OF PORTUGAL)
THE NAVIGATOR. By C. R.
Beazley.

JULIAN THE PHILOSOPHER.
By Alice Gardner.

LOUIS XIV. By Arthur Hassall.

CHARLES XII. By R. Nisbet Bain.

LORENZO DE' MEDICI. By Ed-
ward Armstrong.

JEANNE D'ARC. By Mrs. Oliphant.

CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS. By
Washington Irving.

ROBERT THE BRUCE. By Sir
Herbert Maxwell.

HANNIBAL. By W. O'Connor Mor-
ns.

ULYSSES S. GRANT. By WiUiam

Conant Church.
ROBERT E.LEE. By Henry Alex-

ander White.
THE CID CAMPEADOR. By H.

Butler Clarke.
SALADIN. By Stanley Lane-Poole.
BISMARCK. By J. W. Headlam.
ALEXANDER THE GREAT. By

Benjamin I. Wheeler.
CHARLEMAGNE. By H. W. C.

Davis.
OLIVER CROMWELL. By Charles

Firth.
RICHELIEU. By James B.Perkins.
DANIEL O'CONNELL. By Robert

Dunlop.
SAINT LOUIS (Louis IX., of France).

By Frederick Perry.
LORD CHATHAM. Ey Walford
Davis Green.

Other volumes in preparation are

MOLTKE. By Spencer Wilkinson.

JUDAS MACCABiEUS. By Israel
Abrahams.

HENRY V. By Charles L. Kings-
ford.

SOBIESKI. By F. A. Pollard.

ALFRED THE TRUTHTELLER.
By Frederick Perry.

FREDERICK II. By A. L. Smith.
MARLBOROUGH. By C. W. C.

Oman.
RICHARD THE LION-HEARTED.

By T. A. Archer.
WILLIAM THE SILENT. By Ruth

Putnam.
JUSTINIAN. By Edward Jenks.

G P PUTNAM'S SONS, Publishers, New York and London..

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY