We can tell him of the strong shudder which ran through all this world when its head and ruler fell.  When he asks concerning the infinite variety of these multiplied works which are set in such an orderly unity, and run up into man as their reasonable head, we can tell him of the exuberance of God’s goodness and remind him of the deep philosophy which lies in those simple words—­“All thy works praise Thee, O God, and thy saints give thanks unto Thee.”  For it is one office of redeemed man to collect the inarticulate praises of the material creation, and pay them with conscious homage into the treasury of the supreme Lord.

* * * * *

It is by putting restraint upon fancy that science is made the true trainer of our intellect:—­

“A study of the Newtonian philosophy,” says Sedgwick, “as affecting our moral powers and capacities, does not terminate in mere negations.  It teaches us to see the finger of God in all things animate and inaminate [Transcriber’s note:  sic], and gives us an exalted conception of His attributes, placing before us the clearest proof of their reality; and so prepares, or ought to prepare, the mind for the reception of that higher illumination which brings the rebellious faculties into obedience to the Divine will.”—­Studies of the University, p. 14.

It is by our deep conviction of the truth and importance of this view for the scientific mind of England that we have been led to treat at so much length Mr. Darwin’s speculation.  The contrast between the sober, patient, philosophical courage of our home philosophy, and the writings of Lamarck and his followers and predecessors, of MM.  Demaillet, Bory de Saint Vincent, Virey, and Oken,[1] is indeed most wonderful; and it is greatly owing to the noble tone which has been given by those great men whose words we have quoted to the school of British science.  That Mr. Darwin should have wandered from this broad highway of nature’s works into the jungle of fanciful assumption is no small evil.  We trust that he is mistaken in believing that he may count Sir C. Lyell as one of his converts.  We know indeed the strength of the temptations which he can bring to bear upon his geological brother.  The Lyellian hypothesis, itself not free from some of Mr. Darwin’s faults, stands eminently in need for its own support of some such new scheme of physical life as that propounded here.  Yet no man has been more distinct and more logical in the denial of the transmutation of species than Sir C. Lyell, and that not in the infancy of his scientific life, but in its full vigour and maturity.

[1] It may be worth while to exhibit to our readers a few of Dr. Oken’s
    postulates or arguments as specimens of his views:—­
      I wrote the first edition of 1810 in a kind of inspiration.
      4.  Spirit is the motion of mathematical ideas.
      10.  Physio-philosphy [Transcriber’s note:  sic] has to ... pourtray