This is not entirely accurate. In fact, most scientists proceeded on the basis of a creation hypothesis, but then attempted to conduct genuine scientific investigation for evidence in support of the hypothesis. While certainly one can criticize much of what passed for science 150 years ago, in particular if one compares it with science of today, it is a fact that many genuine scientists of the time did genuine scientific work to try to support the hypothesis of creation. It was in large part because that work was fruitless, and often pointed in different directions, that the creation hypothesis was rejected as scientifically unsupported.
I agree. I probably didn't phrase this exactly the way I understand it. Yes, many pre-modern scientists i.e. Newton, Galileo, etc worked off the premis that the universe was divinely created. My point is that there was no alternative theory of how the universe could have come into existence according to their worldview. It is as you said, only by digging deeper into the inner mechanics of the universe i.e. a geo-centric solar system vice a helo-centric one or discovering the old age of the earth, that these early scientists began to discover that the actual science did not match their previous religious beliefs.
"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." Dr. Carl Sagan
™ Version 4.2