posively; nor is the purposiveness of such an
organ, we will say, as the eye, barred by the fact that invention has
doubtless been aided by some of those happy accidents which from time to
time happen to all who keep their wits about them, and know how to turn
the gifts of Fortune to account.

FOOTNOTES:

[371] 'Origin of Species,' p. 109.

[372] 'Origin of Species, p. 401.

[373] 'Phil. Zool.,' tom. i. p. 242.

[374] 'Phil. Zool.,' tom. i. p. 244.

[375] 'Phil. Zool.,' tom. i. p. 245.

APPENDIX.

CHAPTER I.

REVIEWS OF 'EVOLUTION, OLD AND NEW.'

Those who have been at the pains to read the foregoing book will,
perhaps, pardon me if I put before them a short account of the reception
it has met with: I will not waste time by arguing with my critics at any
length; it will be enough if I place some of their remarks upon my book
under the same cover as the book itself, with here and there a word or
two of comment.

The only reviews which have come under my notice appeared in the
'Academy' and the 'Examiner,' both of May 17, 1879; the 'Edinburgh Daily
Review,' May 23, 1879; 'City Press,' May 21, 1879; 'Field,' May 26,
1879; 'Saturday Review,' May 31, 1879; 'Daily Chronicle,' May 31, 1879;
'Graphic' and 'Nature,' both June 12, 1879; 'Pall Mall Gazette,' June
18, 1879; 'Literary World,' June 20, 1879; 'Scotsman,' June 24, 1879;
'British Journal of Homoeopathy' and 'Mind,' both July 1, 1879;
'Journal of Science,' July 18, 1879; 'Westminster Review,' July, 1879;
'Athenaeum,' July 26, 1879; 'Daily News,' July 29, 1879; 'Manchester
City News,' August 16, 1879; 'Nonconformist,' November 26, 1879;
'Popular Science Review,' Jan. 1, 1880; 'Morning Post,' Jan. 12, 1880.

Some of the most hostile passages in the reviews above referred to are
as follows:--

"From beginning to end, our eccentric author treats us to a dazzling
flood of epigram, invective, and what appears to be argument; and
finally leaves us without a single clear idea as to what he has been
driving at."

. . . . . .

"Mr. Butler comes forward, as it were, to proclaim himself a
professional satirist, and a mystifier who will do his best to leave you
utterly in the dark with regard to his system of juggling. Is he a
teleological theologian making fun of evolution? Is he an evolutionist
making fun of teleology? Is he a man of letters making fun of science?
Or is he a master of pure irony making fun of all three, and of his
audience a