predestinating {222}
intelligent will--for instance, the horse predestinated and prepared for
man; and on page 90 of vol. V. of "Transactions of the Zooelogical Society,"
he says, "that natural evolution, through secondary causes, by means of
slow physical and organic operations through long ages, is not the less
clearly recognizable as the act of all-adaptive Mind, because we have
abandoned the old error of supposing it the result of a primary, direct and
sudden act of creational construction.... The succession of species by
continuously operating law is not necessarily a 'blind operation.' Such
law, however designed in the properties and successions of natural objects,
intimates, nevertheless, a preconceived progress. Organisms may be evolved
in orderly succession, stage after stage, towards a foreseen goal, and the
broad features of the course may still show the unmistakable impress of
Divine volition."

Professor Huxley, of London, the zealous and oft-mentioned advocate of the
descent of man from the ape, says--what is so energetically contested by
his warmest friends in Germany, by Buechner, Haeckel, O. Schmidt, and
others--that the teleological and the mechanical mode of viewing nature by
no means exclude one another. He does this, of course, without going into
any details of the religious question.

Asa Gray, an eminent and highly esteemed American botanist, who is
particularly respected by Darwin, and is supported also by Sir Charles
Lyell in "The Antiquity of Man," says in his essay on "Natural Selection
not Incompatible with Natural Theology, a Free Examination of Darwin's
Treatise" (London, Truebner, 1861), on page 29: "Agreeing that plants and
animals {223} were produced by Omnipotent _fiat_ does not exclude the idea
of natural order and what we call secondary causes. The record of the
_fiat_--'Let the earth bring forth grass,' etc., 'the living creature,'
etc.,--seems even to imply them, and leads to the conclusion that the
different species were produced through natural agencies." And on page 38:
"Darwin's hypothesis concerns the _order_ and not the _cause_, the _how_
and not the _why_ of the phenomena, and so leaves the question of design
just where it was before." And finally, in a passage which is adopted by
Sir Charles Lyell (ib. page 505): "We may imagine that events and
operations in general go on in virtue simply of forces communicated at the
first, and without any subsequent interference, or we ma