470 
I cannot believe that the identification of the arguments 
for Organic Evolution with those for Natural Selection 
has been consciously adopted by Mr. Darwin and some of 
his followers in the spirit of the special pleader. How, 
then, can we account for this singular intellectual phe 
nomenon? If we seek for an explanation of this confusion, 
it is to be found, first of all, in the fact that the battle of 
Natural Selection was waged against the traditional view 
of the fixity of species. 
We can hardly realise at the present day how strong the 
belief in the fixity of species once was. And yet we 
need not wonder that the belief in the fixity of species 
was a generally accepted doctrine. For, in the first 
place, it was taught in the Bible, and piety has always 
accepted the teaching of the Bible on scientific points, as 
long as it has been possible to do so. In the second place, 
the theory of the instantaneous creation of species and 
their continuance in an unchanged state until the present 
day, was implied in the stately poetry of Milton’s Paradise 
Lost, which aided the popular imagination in realising the 
Biblical picture. This influence has been doubtless en 
hanced by the co-operation of the musician. The thrilling 
strains and the descriptive music of Haydn enforced the 
poet’s picture. The poet’s description— 
“ the tender grass whose verdure clad 
Her universal face with pleasant green,” 
finds its echo in the musician’s exquisite air, “With verdure 
clad.” 
But in addition to this, the general public were given 
to understand that all the authorities of the scientific 
world were on the side of this doctrine. In other words, 
those who had observed the organic world declared that 
it confirmed the teaching of Divine Revelation. This