The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-09-03
souE NEW ROOKs.
Hv,xrz,rny on Darwtuism Showing Darwtn's
t.reafe-t service TO Natural science.

ward College has acquired during the last twenty
years. she Is indebted to three men. The work
performed by Aeassz In natural history and ~
Serries wyman In comparative anatomy - OF
sourse popularity recognized; but stuuehS VI
botany have long regarded the achievements Oh
Prof GRAY In the accumulation aud oissitN'uR
Of pbyto graphic m terI,ls rs well nigh equally
noteworthy. Upon Amcrc IN dora. at all events
Ia n the efeatest living authority, and "a, In
ascd. the only man who, bringing competent
squipme nt to tho work. has subjected th'' ueu
Of research to protracted and systematic STUDY
All this is or ou1at To he. we'll known; AMI we
mould not now recall II II we did not feel CON
Strained to add that a recent reprint OF reV'e"s
md essays. DirCinidnd. 10y ASA G8AY o. Ap-
blston q Co.., seems unlikely to add anytn'nsto
the authors reputation.
In tbs miscellaneous papers here collected, no |
sftsmpt Is made to work out a rigorous analysis |
If the eroun Is for Ddfwin's special theory Oh |
sxssination, much less to di'cuss from aoro'uer
ptsnd ooint the general topic Of evolution or Of
fsr any positive contribution to methodologv.
sps junction which Prof. Gray consents for the
ponoe TO exc else is that OF DMwins Interpreter,
md. although we appreciate his motives for as
suming the role AZ the time when much OF this
yolums was written-some fifteen years ago-it
would seem that mere exposition might now
With safety be committed to hands less busy
than his. Moreover, the last decade and half
has been q period OF so much progress, we
might even say OF revolution, In natural science
that the contributions OF Prof. Gray In 1889 to
the Atlantic Monthly and other periodicals have
lost some what OF their value a. reflex OF au-
shoritative opinion. II, for instance. the third
and fourth articles here reprinted had been
written IN the present year, we do not doubt
Mat the author would have spoken with much
k.~s d,fi deuce Of Prof. Agassiz's extraordinary
vfsws respecting the origin, dispersion varlA-
Non, and oharac eri-tics OF species. But asst
h. the average reader-and Of course the book
eontemplates popular audience-is lett 10 IN
DIR from the delicate treatment accorded TO the
writer's colleague that the weight OF Darwin's
pptnions on the above subjects Is balanced, SO
10 speak, by the vagiries Of the Cambridge nat
uraItst. As an indepe ndent iuvestig ator In any
Afrsctiop, MI. Fiske Is very far from possessing
ire claims of Prof. GRAY on our attention yet
70 are bound TO say that the formers presenta-
Non OF the points at issue between Darwin and
Agassiz Is more candid and therefore moro
pervpiouous.
There is indeed one essay In this voume-the
reprint OF an address to the Amerc, an Associa-
zion for the Advancement OF Science-whch
deals with a topic within Prof. Griv's own
province, the famous Sequoia trees Of California;
Here the substantial fruits VI patient ANALYSIS
and collation. are stated with simplicity and
modesty characteristic Of the writer. He points
out that the red woods of the Pacific oist have
emily two tolcrably near relatives, one Of which
y the bald cypress OF our Southern states, and
the other u sort OF modified Iarodium. the so
called Glyp,osbrotus, found In China. We may
sdd tnat his ex plsnation OF this and analogous
condolences In the fora Of western America
end eastern Asia is received with favor by the
majority of botanists.
Even those earlier reviews and notices which
ith Na ova fnfs 10 ma va ID r.
italy outllved their usefulness are still lot rest
ing 10 one respect showing as they do that the
writer's friendly attitude toward Darwinism was
taken at a time when such stand required Tar
more boldness aud intellectual Independence
than II does now Ii is clear that from the nrsi
Prof. Gray. Ike De Candoe, George Dentham
and a few other scientists OF established
rsputation yielded conditional assent pend
~ - saou1smsusary sno- soooAuaAys 'pso0f-ts
amount utility OF the above named theory and
Of the aphorism, Mature aonors close fertiiza
uon' as guides and arbiters OF research, Is recog
nized again and AZ in In the pages Of this vol
VINE. And doubtless It was the vicarious appll.
cation Of these principles which the writer
partly had In mind when he ascribed TO them a
deeper impression upon natural history than
has been made since Linnsus
The nnal and most elaborate CHAPTER OF the
DOCK Is wholly new. This and preceding pa
per, entitled Evolution and 1heology," arc
well worth reading by those who would ike To
know how the theololcii tendencies attr. buted
id certain quarters to the Twlnian o .inion are
regarded by one who IL scientifically and, after
his own fashion, DarSinist, philo. ophic Ally a
convinced tneist, and relgiousY an acceptor
OF the "cteed commonly called the Nicene "
- the exponent u The Christian faith
III seems that DR.. Hodge OF Princeton in his
-systematic Theology" mad classed under the
bead OF "Anti-scrlptural rneories" the Oar
winian hypothe-i-. contending that :" the sys-
tem Ia thoroushly atheistic" Prof. Gray does
not dehy That Darwin has laii hin self oDen to
this kind Of attack, and thinks IN II the pro
FOUNDER OF natural selection might DO expected
70 make the most Of the principe e, aud to over
work the law OF parsimpny In its behalf More
over. as'stem in which exquisite adaptation of
means TO ends, complicated Observation-Disclosures
and orderly sequences, appear "a results, instead
81 being Introduced as factors, and Ia wnic IA
special ds-ign Is ignored In tho particl lars
must needs be obnoxious 20 many persons, UNI
isas guarded as possibly Darwin might have
guarded his ground had he CHOSEN to do So.
Eevertheles Prof Gray's opinion formed affair
long consideration, Is hat Darwin has no athe-
bucai intent, and that "a respec : the test aues-
non OF design In nature his view may be made
eiear To the theological mind BY likeniug II to
'n" VI the oeleVer In general out not In partic-
si1 providence otherwise, indee !, why should
~ author-"the most candid Of man ret in
th'oush all the editions Of the "Origin Of spe-
eies' tho two notices from wneweu and
Bishop butlerf 1t will be remembered that ina
latter snlrms distinctly, that what ia na,nrI
shat is, stated, dred, or settle as much reo,lres
ana presupposes an intelligent agent to render
So e., to enect IL continually OF at stated
umes a. what Is supernatural or miraculous
eoes to effect Il once. DR.. Hodge, however. had
fhr'her objected tnat "from the nature Of the