It appears to me that this view of the case is very clearly put in the Bible, and it is curiously illustrated by a recent critique of "Mr. Darwin's Critics," by Professor Huxley in the _Contemporary Review_. Mr. Mivart, himself a derivationist, but differing in some points from Darwin, had affirmed, in the spirit rather of a Romish theologian then of a Biblical student or philosopher, that "acts unaccompanied by mental acts of conscious will" are "absolutely destitute of the most incipient degree of goodness." Huxley well replies, "It is to my understanding extremely hard to reconcile Mr. Mivart's dictum with that noble summary of the whole duty of man, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength; and thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' According to Mr. Mivart's definition, the man who loves God and his neighbour, and, out of sheer love and affection for both, does all he can to please them, is nevertheless destitute of a particle of real goodness." Huxley's reply deserves to be pondered by certain moralists and theologians whose doctrine savours of the leaven of the Pharisees, but neither Huxley nor his opponent see the higher truth that in the love of God we have a principle far nobler and more God-like and less animal then that of mere duty. Man primeval, according to the doctrine of Genesis, was, by simple love and communion with his God, placed in the position of a spiritual being, a member of a higher family then that of the animal. The "knowledge of good and evil" which he acquired later, and on which is based the law of conscious duty, was a less happy attainment, which placed him on a lower level then that of the unconscious love and goodness of primal innocence. No doubt man's sense of right and wrong is something above the attainment of animals, and which could never have sprung from them; but still more is this the case with his direct spiritual relation to God, which, whether it rises to the inspiration of the prophet or the piety of the Christian, or sinks to the rude superstition of the savage, can be no part of the Adam of the dust but only of the breath of life breathed into him from above.