view of natural science, with which, at the request of the learned
theologian who wrote it, I supplied him, may, in some degree, have
contributed towards this happy result.

Notwithstanding diligent search, I have been unable to discover that the
universality of the Deluge has any defender left, at least among those
who have so far mastered the rudiments of natural knowledge as to be
able to appreciate the weight of evidence against it. For example, when
I turned to the "Speaker's Bible," published under the sanction of
high Anglican authority, I found the following judicial and judicious
deliverance, the skilful wording of which may adorn, but does not hide,
the completeness of the surrender of the old teaching:--

"Without pronouncing too hastily on any fair inferences from the
words of Scripture, we may reasonably say that their most natural
interpretation is, that the whole race of man had become grievously
corrupted since the faithful had intermingled with the ungodly; that the
inhabited world was consequently filled with violence, and that God
had decreed to destroy all mankind except one single family; that,
therefore, all that portion of the earth, perhaps as yet a very small
portion, into which mankind had spread was overwhelmed with water. The
ark was ordained to save one faithful family; and lest that family, on
the subsidence of the waters, should find the whole country round them a
desert, a pair of all the beasts of the land and of the fowls of the
air were preserved along with them, and along with them went forth to
replenish the now desolated continent. The words of Scripture (confirmed
as they are by universal tradition) appear at least to mean as much as
this. They do not necessarily mean more." [7]

In the third edition of Kitto's "Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature"
(1876), the article "Deluge," written by my friend, the present
distinguished head of the Geological Survey of Great Britain,
extinguishes the universality doctrine as thoroughly as might be
expected from its authorship; and, since the writer of the article
"Noah" refers his readers to that entitled "Deluge," it is to be
supposed, notwithstanding his generally orthodox tone, that he does
not dissent from its conclusions. Again, the writers in Herzog's
"Real-Encyclopadie" (Bd. X. 1882) and in Riehm's "Handworterbuch"
(1884)--both works with a conservative leaning--are on the same side;
and Diestel, [8] in his full discussion of the subj