iticism of 'Evolution, Old and New,' to which I would
call attention, appeared in 'Nature,' in a review of 'Unconscious
Memory,' by Mr. Romanes, and contained the following passages:--
"But to be serious, if in charity we could deem Mr. Butler a lunatic, we
should not be unprepared for any aberration of common sense that he
might display.... A certain nobody writes a book ['Evolution, Old and
New'] accusing the most illustrious man in his generation of burying the
claims of certain illustrious predecessors out of the sight of all men.
In the hope of gaining some notoriety by deserving, and perhaps
receiving a contemptuous refutation from the eminent man in question, he
publishes this book which, if it deserved serious consideration, would
be not more of an insult to the particular man of science whom it
accuses of conscious and wholesale plagiarism [there is no such
accusation in 'Evolution, Old and New'] than it would be to men of
science in general for requiring such elementary instruction on some of
the most famous literature in science from an upstart ignoramus, who,
until two or three years ago, considered himself a painter by
profession."--'Nature,' Jan. 27, 1881.
* * * * *
In a subsequent letter to 'Nature,' Mr. Romanes said he had been "acting
the part of policeman" by writing as he had done. Any unscrupulous
reviewer may call himself a policeman if he likes, but he must not
expect those whom he assails to recognize his pretensions. 'Evolution,
Old and New,' was not written for the kind of people whom Mr. Romanes
calls men of science; if "men of science" means men like Mr. Romanes, I
trust they say well who maintain that I am not a man of science; I
believe the men to whom Mr. Romanes refers to be men, not of that kind
of science which desires to know, but of that kind whose aim is to
thrust itself upon the public as actually knowing. 'Evolution, Old and
New,' could be of no use to these; certainly, it was not intended as an
insult to them, but if they are insulted by it, I do not know that I am
sorry, for I value their antipathy and opposition as much as I should
dislike their approbation: of one thing, however, I am certain--namely,
that before 'Evolution, Old and New,' was written, Professors Huxley and
Tyndall, for example, knew very little of the earlier history of
Evolution. Professor Huxley, in his article on Evolution in the ninth
edition of the 'Encyclopaedia Britannica,' publi
|