animalcules　is　not　the　microscope；　though　it　is　effectuated　by　means
  of　the　microscope；　and　our　feeling　is　not　the　nervous　system；　though
  the　nervous　system　is　the　instrument　that　enables　us　to　feel。
  The　nervous　system　is　a　device　which　living　beings　have　gradually
  perfectedI　believe　I　may　say　quite　trulythrough　the　will　and
  power　which　they　have　derived　from　a　fountain…head；　the　existence　of
  which　we　can　infer；　but　which　we　can　never　apprehend。　　By　the　help
  of　this　device；　and　in　proportion　as　they　have　perfected　it；　living
  beings　feel　ever　with　greater　definiteness；　and　hence　formulate
  their　feelings　in　thought　with　more　and　more　precision。　　The　higher
  evolution　of　thought　has　reacted　on　the　nervous　system；　and　the
  consequent　higher　evolution　of　the　nervous　system　has　again　reacted
  upon　thought。　　These　things　are　as　power　and　desire；　or　supply　and
  demand；　each　one　of　which　is　continually　outstripping；　and　being　in
  turn　outstripped　by　the　other；　but；　in　spite　of　their　close
  connection　and　interaction；　power　is　not　desire；　nor　demand　supply。
  Language　is　a　device　evolved　sometimes　by　leaps　and　bounds；　and
  sometimes　exceedingly　slowly；　whereby　we　help　ourselves　alike　to
  greater　ease；　precision；　and　complexity　of　thought；　and　also　to　more
  convenient　interchange　of　thought　among　ourselves。　　Thought　found
  rude　expression；　which　gradually　among　other　forms　assumed　that　of
  words。　　These　reacted　upon　thought；　and　thought　again　on　them；　but
  thought　is　no　more　identical　with　words　than　words　are　with　the
  separate　letters　of　which　they　are　composed。
  To　sum　up；　then；　and　to　conclude。　　I　would　ask　you　to　see　the
  connection　between　words　and　ideas；　as　in　the　first　instance
  arbitrary。　　No　doubt　in　some　cases　an　imitation　of　the　cry　of　some
  bird　or　wild　beast　would　suggest　the　name　that　should　be　attached　to
  it；　occasionally　the　sound　of　an　operation　such　as　grinding　may　have
  influenced　the　choice　of　the　letters　g；　r；　as　the　root　of　many　words
  that　denote　a　grinding；　grating；　grasping；　crushing；　action；　but　I
  understand　that　the　number　of　words　due　to　direct　imitation　is
  comparatively　few　in　number；　and　that　they　have　been　mainly　coined
  as　the　result　of　connections　so　far…fetched　and　fanciful　as　to
  amount　practically　to　no　connection　at　all。　　Once　chosen；　however；
  they　were　adhered　to　for　a　considerable　time　among　the　dwellers　in
  any　given　place；　so　as　to　become　acknowledged　as　the　vulgar　tongue；
  and　raise　readily　in　the　mind　of　the　inhabitants　of　that　place　the
  ideas　with　which　they　had　been　artificially　associated。
  As　regards　our　being　able　to　think　and　reason　without　words；　the
  Duke　of　Argyll　has　put　the　matter　as　soundly　as　I　have　yet　seen　it
  stated。　　〃It　seems　to　me；〃　he　wrote；　〃quite　certain　that　we　can　and
  do　constantly　think　of　things　without　thinking　of　any　sound　or　word
  as　designating　them。　　Language　seems　to　me　to　be　necessary　for　the
  progress　of　thought；　but　not　at　all　for　the　mere　act　of　thinking。
  It　is　a　product　of　thought；　an　expression　of　it；　a　vehicle　for　the
  communication　of　it；　and　an　embodiment　which　is　essential　to　its
  growth　and　continuity；　but　it　seems　to　me　altogether　erroneous　to
  regard　it　as　an　inseparable　part　of　cogitation。〃
  The　following　passages；　again；　are　quoted　from　Sir　William　Hamilton
  in　Professor　Max　Muller's　own　book；　with　so　much　approval　as　to　lead
  one　to　suppose　that　the　differences　between　himself　and　his
  opponents　are　in　reality　less　than　he　believes　them　to　be：…
  〃Language；〃　says　Sir　W。　Hamilton；　〃is　the　attribution　of　signs　to
  our　cognitions　of　things。　　But　as　a　cognition　must　have　already　been
  there　before　it　could　receive　a　sign；　consequently　that　knowledge
  which　is　denoted　by　the　formation　and　application　of　a　word　must
  have　preceded　the　symbol　that　denotes　it。　　A　sign；　however；　is
  necessary　to　give　stability　to　our　intellectual　progressto
  establish　each　step　in　our　advance　as　a　new　starting…point　for　our
  advance　to　another　beyond。　　A　country　may　be　overrun　by　an　armed
  host；　but　it　is　only　conquered　by　the　establishment　of　fortresses。
  Words　are　the　fortresses　of　thought。　　They　enable　us　to　realise　our
  dominion　over　what　we　have　already　overrun　in　thought；　to　make　every
  intellectual　conquest　the　base　of　operations　for　others　still
  beyond。〃
  〃This；〃　says　Professor　Max　Muller；　〃is　a　most　happy　illustration；〃
  and　he　proceeds　to　quote　the　following；　also　from　Sir　William
  Hamilton；　which　he　declares　to　be　even　happier　still。
  〃You　have　all　heard；〃　says　Sir　William　Hamilton；　〃of　the　process　of
  tunnelling　through　a　sandbank。　　In　this　operation　it　is　impossible
  to　succeed　unless　every　foot；　nay；　almost　every　inch　of　our　progress
  be　secured　by　an　arch　of　masonry　before　we　attempt　the　excavation　of
  another。　　Now　language　is　to　the　mind　precisely　what　the　arch　is　to
  the　tunnel。　　The　power　of　thinking　and　the　power　of　excavation　are
  not　dependent　on　the　words　in　the　one　case　or　on　the　mason…work　in
  the　other；　but　without　these　subsidiaries　neither　could　be　carried
  on　beyond　its　rudimentary　commencement。　　Though；　therefore；　we　allow
  that　every　movement　forward　in　language　must　be　determined　by　an
  antecedent　movement　forward　in　thought；　still；　unless　thought　be
  accompanied　at　each　point　of　its　evolutions　by　a　corresponding
  evolution　of　language；　its　further　development　is　arrested。〃
  Man　has　evolved　an　articulate　language；　whereas　the　lower　animals
  seem　to　be　without　one。　　Man；　therefore；　has　far　outstripped　them　in
  reasoning　faculty　as　well　as　in　power　of　expression。　　This；　however；
  does　not　bar　the　communications　which　the　lower　animals　make　to　one
  another　from　possessing　all　the　essential　characteristics　of
  language；　and　as　a　matter　of　fact；　wherever　we　can　follow　them　we
  find　such　communications　effectuated　by　the　aid　of　arbitrary　symbols
  covenanted　upon　by　the　living　beings　that　wish　to　communicate；　and
  persistently　associated　with　certain　corresponding　feelings；　states
  of　mind；　or　material　objects。　　Human　language　is　nothing　more　than
  this　in　principle；　however　much　further　the　principle　has　been
  carried　in　our　own　case　than　in　that　of　the　lower　animals。
  This　being　admitted；　we　should　infer　that　the　thought　or　reason　on
  which　the　language　of　men　and　animals　is　alike　founded　differs　as
  between　men　and　brutes　in　degree　but　not　in　kind。　　More　than　this
  cannot　be　claimed　on　behalf　of　the　lower　animals；　even　by　their　most
  enthusiastic　admirer。
  THE　DEADLOCK　IN　DARWINISM　｛20｝PART　I
  It　will　be　readily　admitted　that　of　all　living　writers　Mr。　Alfred
  Russel　Wallace　is　the　one　the　peculiar　turn　of　whose　mind　best　fits
  him　to　write　on　the　subject　of　natural　selection；　or　the
  accumulation　of　fortunate　but　accidental　variations　through　descent
  and　the　struggle　for　existence。　　His　mind　in　all　its　more　essential
  characteristics　closely　resembles　that　of　the　late　Mr。　Charles
  Darwin　himself；　and　it　is　no　doubt　due　to　this　fact　that　he　and　Mr。
  Darwin　elaborated　their　famous　theory　at　the　same　time；　and
  independently　of　one　another。　　I　shall　have　occasion　in　the　course
  of　the　following　article　to　show　how　misled　and　misleading　both
  these　distinguished　men　have　been；　in　spite　of　their　unquestionable
  familiarity　with　the　whole　range　of　animal　and　vegetable　phenomena。
  I　believe　it　will　be　more　respectful　to　both　of　them　to　do　this　in
  the　most　out…spoken　way。　　I　believe　their　work　to　have　been　as
  mischievous　as　it　has　been　valuable；　and　as　valuable　as　it　has　been
  mischievous；　and　higher；　whether　praise　or　blame；　I　know　not　how　to
  give。　　Nevertheless　I　would　in　the　outset；　and　with　the　utmost
  sincerity；　admit　concerning　Messrs。　Wallace　and　Darwin　that　neither
  can　be　held　as　the　more　profound　and　conscientious　thinker；　neither
  can　be　put　forward　as　the　more　ready　to　acknowledge　obligation　to
  the　great　writers　on　evolution　who　had　preceded　him；　or　to　place　his
  own　developments　in　closer　and　more　conspicuous　historical
  connection　with　earlier　thought　upon　the　subject；　neither　is　the
  more　ready　to　welcome　criticism　and　to　state　his　opponent's　case　in
  the　most　pointed　and　telling　way　in　which　it　can　be　put；　neither　is
  the　more　quick　to　encourage　new　truth；　neither　is　the　more　genial；
  generous　adversary；　or　has　the　profounder　horror　of　anything　even
  approaching　literary　or　scientific　want　of　candour；　both　display　the
  same　inimitable　power　of　putting　their　opinions　forward　in　the　way
  that　shall　best　ensure　their　acceptance；　both　are　equally　unrivalled
  in　the　tact　that　tells　them　when　silence　will　be　golden；　and　when　on
  the　other　hand　a　whole　volume　of　facts　may　be　advantageously　brought
  forward。　　Less　than　the　foregoing　tribute　both　to　Messrs。　Darwin　and
  Wallace　I　will　not；　and　more　I　cannot　pay。
  Let　us　now　turn　to　the　most　authoritative　exponent　of　latter…day
  evolutionI　mean　to　Mr。　Wallace；　whose　work；　entitled　〃Darwinism；〃
  though　it　should　have　been　entitled　〃Wallaceism；〃　is　still　so　far
  Darwinistic　that　it　develops　the　teaching　of　Mr。　Darwin　in　the
  direction　given　to　it　by　Mr。　Darwin　himselfso　far；　indeed；　as　this
  can　be　ascertained　at　alland　not　in　that　of　Lamarck。　　Mr。　Wallace
  tells　us；　on　the　first　page　of　his　preface；　that　he　has　no　intention
  of　dealing　even　in　outline　with　th