accordingly he finds that the variations are slight. This 
he speaks as the exponent of the theory of Natural 
Selection, but this does not prevent him from recording 
observations, which he makes as a student of nature, and 
which do not accord with the theory. 
It seems to me to be quite conceivable that the same 
man may be an acute logician and a careful observer of 
nature. In one capacity he will expound the inevitable 
results of a principle which he supposes to be a law of nature. 
He may say : on my theory this or that will happen—this 
or ‘that will be found to exist. And the same man may go 
forth to observe nature and simply report with conscien 
tious exactness the phenomena that he observes. And 
perhaps it is because many men are in this way most 
honestly double-minded, that the dictum of George Eliot 
is fulfilled when she says in the proem to Romola : “ The 
human soul is hospitable, and will entertain conflicting sen 
timents and contradictory opinions with much impartiality.” 
But sometimes it would seem that this discrepancy is 
observed. Perhaps it was this feeling which led Mr. 
Darwin to omit a very remarkable passage in The 
Variation* from the second edition of that work. 
So far as the different views of the cruelty of the strife 
in nature are concerned, the judgment on this question 
will largely depend upon the subjective view of the 
spectator. To some the greatness and the cruelty of 
the carnage are most apparent. Others will dwell on 
the joy of life which does exist in spite of mortal woes 
and dangers. Sir Samuel Baker, having told us how to 
kill with great certainty and efficiency every wild creature 
in nature, moralises on the bitter struggle for existence 
which is everywhere apparent to him. 
Vol. ii., p, 424—already (¡noted.