The Continental Monthly, Volume 5, Issue 4 | Page 6

the able but absurd Review before referred to would insist. It
must verify its own facts. It cannot heed the caveat of any number or
body of clergymen, or orthodox weekly newspapers, who might come
forward and say, respecting the unity of the race, or the antiquity of
man: 'Gentlemen, that question is settled. It is put beyond the purview
of your science. An absolute and infallible authority has determined it.
To moot it is profane.' Any such attempt would be both preposterous
and useless. The age will defend the freedom of science; and let all
reasonable and right-thinking men take comfort in the conviction that
in the long run the conclusions reached will be right, in accordance
with fact, in accordance with truth, and that no permanent interest of
religion or morals can suffer.

But we beg pardon for holding the reader so long by the button, while
Sir Charles Lyell and his book have been kept in the background.
These thoughts have been upon our mind for many months, and we
have felt impelled to give utterance to them here.
The publication of this work we regard as an eventful matter in the
history of modern thought. The time could not have been far distant
when what we may call the geological history of man on this planet,
must have come before the popular mind; and it is certainly a matter of
congratulation that one of the most venerable, indefatigable, cautious,
and successful investigators of modern times has undertaken the task of
giving to the public a full and labored résumé of the evidence which
has accumulated on the subject. Not unfrequently are the bigotry and
prejudice of well-meaning religious people intensified by the imprudent
zeal of the Hotspurs of science. True science can always afford to bide
its time, and make haste slowly.
Respecting the work itself, we begin by saying that the theme proposed
is a perfectly legitimate one for science. It is entirely pertinent to
science to undertake to search for the hidden traces of man's former
history, if there be any. It is no dreamland or cloudland which it
proposes to explore. It is no Quixotic adventure which it has gotten up
to astonish and alarm the vulgar. If our human ancestors have lived
fifty or one hundred thousand years longer on this planet than was
generally supposed, it is quite likely they have left some traces behind
them. And if so, it is perfectly legitimate for science to gather, collate,
and interpret those traces. And from what we know of her past
achievements, we may assure ourselves that if man has had such a
pre-historic existence, science will most undoubtedly prove it. She has
proved beyond all sane contradiction the great age of the earth. She has
proved in like manner the vast extent of the universe in space. She has
proved the existence of manifold forms of animal life on this planet for
countless ages before the incoming of man, according to the popular
chronology. She has proved, approximately, the order and succession
of animal life as it arose, and the forms it assumed as the long cycles of
ages rolled on. All these were legitimate themes for science; and all of
them were opposed to the popular belief at the time--as much so as is

the antiquity of man now. And further, we say that the mere suspicion
that any such thing may be--the mere surmise of any such fact--the
merest inkling which scientific men may get of a secret yet hidden
beneath the veil, and waiting to be revealed--is a sufficient justification
of those tentative efforts of science which often result in the attainment
of some grand discovery. Let no timid religionist charge upon scientific
men that they are conspiring with malice prepense to undermine the
popular creeds and overthrow the Bible. This is sheer nonsense. They
follow where nature beckons them. If man has had a high antiquity on
this earth, science will find it out and prove it beyond a doubt. If he has
not had such antiquity, science will discover that too, and prove it. All
we have to do is to let science have her way.
Another remark which we make here, is respecting the power which a
single fact may have in this investigation. It is not often that great
questions in history, or social polity, or jurisprudence are determined
by a single fact. The great results of history, economics, and law are
effected by the converging power of many facts. So also in science. Its
great results are determined by the accumulated power of multitudinous
facts. Its final categories are fixed by abundant certainties and manifold
inductions. And yet it may sometimes occur that a single fact may be of
such a nature that there is