WHY— SOME FAIRLY INTELLIGENT PERSONS DO NOT ENDORSE THE HYPOTHESIS OF EVOLUTION A Plea for Divine Intention in Creation. By JAMES CARMICHAEL, Dean of vMontrcal. MONTREAL : Printed bv Thk Gazettk PKiNTix(i Company. 1H9H nriHIS pamphlet is not iiieant as an exegesis of tlie ^ account of creation given in the first chapter of the Book of Genesis, although the principles con- tained in that account have been ever present in the mind of the author as he wrote. For, apart wholly from the descriptive language of Genesis, there are great principles in its account of creation that cannot easiW be explained away, and that should not 1)6 ignored. These ])rinciples are as fol- lows : First. The Divine Mind lies behind each <2;reat creative act ; nothing moves until the commiind is iiiven " Let there be." Second. Forms of life, vet2:e- table or animal, appear according to their respective " kinds," their ]_)ernianeiice and reproduction being })rovided for in the organization of each priiuary form. Third. Man is described as a special creation, and as such appears on the scene, physically and mentally a complete personality, able to receive and understand commands as a responsible l)eing. Fourth. There is not one word said as to how God " ere ited " and "made," the record onlv liiviuii" us results. (yonse(iuently, a fair and wide field of reverenti IV speciilation lies open to scientific minds jis to the Divine institution ot* natural laws, as to the Divine use of such laws in acts of creation, and as to the creation of primary specific forms existing under such laws, and capable of producing varied sub- forms within the limits of eacii specific kind — grass producing varied forms of its kihd, and winged fowl varied forms after their kind. But all such rever- ential speculation must, if it Logically desires to link God with creation, do so in connection with the willing acknowledgment that the "endless forms, most beautiful and most wonderful," with which nature abounds are the oftspring of the Divine will and not of the unintentional and unEfuided workin": of blind and mindless laws. A PLEA FOR DIVINE INTENTION IN CREATION. By JAMES CARMICHAEL, Dean of Montreal. THE ORIGIN OF THE SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION. The Darwinian hypothesis of Natural Selection distinctly teaches that the Creator moulded one, or a few forms of life, and that, from so simple a ])egin- ning, endless forms, most beautiful and most won- derful, have been, and are being evolved/ The |jrocess of this evolution begins with what is called "the struggle for existence,'' 'Mife being so prolific that it has to be checked ' by destruction.'" The agents of destruction in plant life are overcrowding and insects ; in animal life, want of food, the fierce- ness of preying animals, climatic changes and epi- demic diseases. In this struggle the stronger, or those who possess anything peculiaily ftivorable in their orijanization, must overcome the weaker ; the 1 Origin of Species, p. 429. 6 weaker die out, and the stronger are preserved. " This preservation of favorable variations, and the destrnction of nnfavorable variations," Mr. Darwin cjills Natund Selection. Now, how does this supposititions Natural Selec- tion work? Mr. Darwin takes for granted that it is governed by a law, incessantly ready for action, called the law of Natural Selection, which works as follows : Each profitable variation is for the benefit of the form possessing it, giving it an advantage over its fellows in the strugq^le for existence, as it is less likely to perish than those wh(^ do not posse.>«s it, and as a rule it seems as if it were selected to live, and preserved to live. The result of this is that each creature, selected and preserved, tends to become more and more improved, and this improve- ment inevitably leads, slowly, and at long intervals of time, to the gradual advancement of the organiza- tion of the animal itself; so that in time through almost imperceptible changes a new species of animal life may be produced. In other words, the law of Natural Selection, working in and through the battle-field of life, is ever tending to produce new forms of life, and has produced all the forms that have existed in the past and exist to-day. This hypothesis has been worked out genea- logically by Haeckel in his " History of Creation." ^ ' \^ol. ii., 278. He divides life into twenty-two stngeH. beginning with a fonnlesH morsel of living alhuniinous matter styled a Monera, and ending with Man. Tlie lower forms through Natural Selection produce worms, worms fishes, fishes newts, frogs and other Amphi- bia, Amphibia primary mammals, primary mammals apes, apes ape-like men, and ape-like men, men. This genealogical table is a singularly ingenious piece of workmanship, but it. has to be borne in mind that it is purely imaginary, as eighteen out of the twenty-two links are acknowledged by the genealogist to be necessary assumptions. The method whereby Haeckel claims that Natural Selection works in producing new species is very clearly stated. He cites the case of a number of plants of the same species growing together iu a very dry soil. In this case the hairs on the leaves of the plants are useful for receiving moisture from the air, and, as a consequence, the less hairy leaves perish, and the more heavy will be propagated, and their descendants will be distinguished by stronger and thicker hairs than the individuals of the first generation. If this process is continued for se\ oral generations in one and the same locality, there will arise at last an entirely new species ; for the increase of hairs on the leaves cannot go on without at the same time producing changes in other parts of the plant.^ 1 Vol. i., 165. Now, there is nothing necessarily antagonistic hetvveen a method such as this tor creating varieties of any one species, and the idea of Divine Intelli- gence ordering and working through such a method? except the tremendous fact that advocates of evo- lution, as it is generally advocated and taught, will not admit the idea of Intention into their hypothesis. Darwin, writing against the idea that detail of structure was made for the good of its possessor, says: "Some believe that many structures have been created for the sake of beauty, to delight men or the Creator, or for the sake of mere varietw Such doctrines, if true, would be absolutelv fatal to mv theorv."^ Auain : "Nothing at first can appear more difficult to believe, than that the more complex organs and instincts have been perfected, not )>y means superior to, though anal- ogous with, human reason, but by the accumu- lation of innumerable slight variations, each good for the individual possessor.'' - Haeckel declares that '' the nmch talked of pur- pose in nature " has really no existence except for superficial minds." He also says : " Whilst we emphatically oppose the vital view of animate creation which presents animal and vegetable forma as the production of a kind Creator acting for a ' Origin of Species, p. 159. 2 P. 4(»4. 9 definite purpuKe,or of a creative naturjil torce acting for a definite purpose, we must, on the other hand, decidedly adopt that view of the universe which is called the mechanical or causal." ^ Mr. Iluxlev, in his *' Lav Sermons," writes as fol- lows : " When I first read Mr. Darwin's hook, that which struck me most forcibly was that Teleol- ogy, as commonly undeistood, had received its death blow at Mr. Darwin's hands. For the tele- ological argument runs thus : ' An organ is fitted to perform a function or purpose, therefore it was specially constructed to perform that fu;iction.' This is precisely what Darwin denies with regard to plants and animals. If we apprehend the spirit of the Origin of Species rightly, then nothing can be more entirely and absolutely opposed to Design in Nature than the Darwinian hypothesis. ' - Hence apparent acknowledgments of the Divine Being and the use of the word '' Creator," in the face of statements such as these really amount to very little, and have been alwavs regarded by continental evolutionists as a weakness in their English contemporaries. Thus Carl Voglit states " that Darwin's theory has turned the Creat»)r out of doors, as it does not leave the slightest room for the agency of such a Being,'' ' and Buchner '' that 1 Vol. i., pp. :)-20. - Lay Sermons, 'ASO. '•^ Lectures on Man, vol. ii, 2(%). 10 it is an atheistic theory based on accidental opera- tions." ^ Whatever Mr, Darwin's mind may have been when first he broached the liypothesis, it is clear that his reverence was not passed on to his disciplf^s. WHY AN ARGUMENT HASEI) ON DIVINE INTENTION WAS EVER USED AND WHY MANY STILL USE IT. The tone of evohitionary advocacy, apart from Mr. Darwin, has ever been that of the profoundest faith in the impregnable strength of tlie hypothesis, coupled with a feeling of pity and sometimes open contempt for those who are still foolish enough to claim that nature bears on it the signs of Intention. The advocates of Evolutiim appear to forget that advocates of Intention must have some very stnmg reasons for not falling in with the modern view, however captivating it may at first sight seem. Many of these are by no means unintelligent or iijnorant men, and some of them have been and are men of miudit in the scientific world. Not a few of the former have folio vvt^d the history of the hypothesis from the year 1859 to the present with the keen interest of intelligent readers, and have entered (m the study with unbiased minds, and yet thousands of such men to-day are not only uncon- vinced as to the truth of the hypothesis, but are reasonably sure that, as stated, it does not furnish ' Lectures on Uarwinism, vol. i, 125. 11 a correct idea of creation. Now, there must be some very strong reasons for this position apart wholly from ihe Biblical reason, which, thank God, is not vet *• turned out of doors.'' The first reason is that, however it has come about, the universe, the world and man have gath- v^ed around them and in them an appearance of object, order and method that, if not intentional, is the most extraordinarv harvest of •' titness, full- orbed and radiant," that the mind of man could think of. Even admitting that tiie human eye is not a positively perfect instrument, still it is suf- ficiently perfect to prevent any colutionist thirst- ing to lose it, and as an organ is in its way not only a siniiularlv contrived one, but in everv sense a useful and valuable one. If the eve was not in- tended to be what it is as an organ ; if it was not intended to see with ; if the crystalline lens was not intended to produce distinct perception of form and outline, or the retina to receive the impression of luminous rays ; if the mathematical accuracy which adjusts its parts together was never intended to be accurate; if no such adjustment was ever thought of; then the eye is one of countless evidences to be found in nature which should teach us that the best yet sh)west way to perfect any instrument composed of parts is to give no thought to it what- soever, but to leave it all to chance. Because the trouble with organs such as the eve, the 12 nose, the mouth, and with such thiujxs con- nected with nature as the seasons, tides, celestial movements, etc., is their delusiveness; for they all seem as if thev were intended to do what thev do, and to perform the functions they fulfil. Mr. Darwin felt this so strons^lv with recjard to the eye that with characteristic honesty he acknowl- edged that *' to suppose the eye with all its in- imitaljle contrivances, etc., could have l)een formed by Natural Selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." ^ This very confession bears out the thought that weighs heavily on many non-Evolutionists, Why should it seem absurd ? Be- cause the eve seems to be '' an inimitable contriv- ance for adjusting the focus to difterent distances, for aduiitting difterent amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and cliromatic aberration." It seems to l)e all this; whereas, according to Evo- lution it was never intended to eff'ect anv of these things, and the apj)earances which would lead ordin- ary people t(^ suppose it so intended are delusions. Now, aduiitting Natural Selecticm as the main agent of creatit)n, then this delusiveness runs throuijh the whole of Nature. As a rule things seem to be made with a purpose ; the earth appears to have ))een in- tended to enfold and mature seed, the sun appears to have been intended to give light and heat ; air appears to have been so mixed as to be useful for ^ Origin of species, p. 143. 13 breathing, and the function of respiration appeal's to have been so ordered as to permit ()X\ jien to pene- trate the sn])alance outer forces," etc. The reason ior this ])eculiarity is plain ; unintended things are so like intended things that the only possible wny to describe them is to speak of them a^ if they were intended, — Jin utterly ridiculous position, ])ut cme that under the circumstances cannot easily be avoided. Another very important reason w^hy not a few intelligent persons, who are not scientific special- 15 ists, cannot accept the hypothesis of Evohition is that their actual study of science in connection witli the universe leads them to helieve more firmlv than ever in Divine intention as associated with the universe. For instance, thev are told ])V competent authority that all Matter can he reduced t«j a fairly defined number of elements, each ele- ment being composed of ultimate Atoms — in fact, that the atom lies at the base of tiie universe. Now, if we could get at the characteristic of one atom, we ought to be able to realize whether mind- lossness or intention is w^ritten on it, and this, mar- \ ellous as it seems, science has done. For atoms are wonderful things, moulding and guiding by their weight the proportions in which chemical bodies comliine, and so constant is this combining ratio and proportion that as far as is known no chemical change can alter it ; for it is as if it were stamped on ea(;li separate atom, —as if the whole com))ining power had been arranged beforehand. Hence the late J. Clerk Maxwell states ''eacli atom throughout the universe bears impressed upon it the stamp of a metric system as distinctly as does the metre of the archives of Paris, or the double royal cubit of the temple of Karnac " C(mse(iuently. when we reach atoms we reach not only the foundation of everything, but the com- ]>ined material of all things, and in connection with them, beneath everythinu, we find a metric 16 system, with the atom of each element adopted as the unit on which all measures relating to the weight and capacity of each element are based. That this great underlying system of ultimate weights and measures is the result of non-intention seems to many an utter impossibility ; in no sense can thev imairine it as the result of a natural selec- tion of atoms ; and, therefore, they seem shut up to the conclusion that these unalterable character- istics of atoms were instituted with an ol)ject, and as such imply the action of an intelligent mind behind them. And this position is strengthened by re-ilizing how life itself depends on proportion- ate combination, how every l)reath we draw testi- fies to its necessity. From the study of the Atom and its teaching, it is not hard for an ordinarily intelligent person to rise to some realization of the universe, wdiich is composed of arranged atoms, and within which the united voice of all natural phenomena responds to what fairlv mav be called *' nuithematical axioms." Thus eclipses of the heavenly l)odies respond to the voice of mathematics, and there is no cal- culation or prediction on the whole more certain. Step by step the astronomer forecasts the date of the eclipse, predicts its magnitude, duration and phases, calculates the motion of the shadow, and prepares charts exhibiting the motion — in 17 short, enaljles the public to kixjw the whole record of the eclipse long before the event takes place. Now, this mathematical certainty on the part of the astronomer arises from the mathematical certainty that rules the heavenlv bodies; the earthlv fiirures and language are but the language of the spheres themselves translated bv human mind and brought within the area of human appreciation. The trans- lation is perfect, but only because the original speech is perfect —the language of a universe— the voice of order. If it be acknowledued that the term •* Mathe- matics" covers some of the grandest evidences of human intelligence, and that without Mind you could not possess or appreciate the science, and if it be further acknowledged that the universe, as far as we know of it, is so arranged and ordered that it forms one of the noblest fields that the mathematical mind can work in, then it certainly appears reasonable that the universe, which is arranged mathematically, must have resulted from Mind joined Avith Powder, and that each must have been greater than the splendour of the universe itself. Inorganic nature cannot work out a mathe- matical problem, and organic nature furnishes but one representative that can do so, namely man, and man can alone do so because man is possessed of mind. Hence mind and mathematics nmst go together, ;ind if we find the universe responding to matliemjitical axioms, we are logically driven to the conclusion that the universe has been thought out, — ordered. I know it may he replied "that the strength of the case tor Evolution cannot he realized by general discussions." This may be partially true, but surely a scheme of creation that covers the universe, and all that is therein, should admit of the fullest abstract thought l)eing applied to it. Indeed, un- less Evolution is to be received without anv con- sideration, abstract thought is naturally the line of thouojht that will be followed bv those who are not specialists in distinctive scientific fields. Such per- sons may follow with deepest interest the special arguments derived from Zoology, Botany, etc., but they cannot be expected to follow literally the actual working out of distinct cases placed in evidence ; nor is it to be expected that they should hurriedly pin their faith to such evidence in the face of Mr. Huxlev's doij^matism with reference to the vitality of Bat hy bins, and his apology for his dogmatism, and of other cases by no means uncommon. Indeed, ardent specialists in Evo- lution are so dogmatically certain as to their special facts, that they forget that everything concrete is not yet discovered, and that what they teach dogmatically to-day, is subject to the revision 19 of minds yet to think, and pens yet to write. Hence, abstract tliought which cannot he i)aralyzed should not be regarded as liaving but little to do with the general hypothesis. It is the natural line of thought of non-specialists, and there will always be a majority of this chiss in the field. WHY NATURAL SELECTION IS NOT UNIVERSALLV RECEIVED. It is felt bv manv that evolutionists are some- what circumscribed in their ideas as to the factors connected with material things, although of late it is very plain that a younger school is breaking awav into wider fields, and no doubt in due time Natural Selection will come to be regarded as a factor, rather than the factor. But whv should a like privilege be denied to believers in Intelligent Creation? Admit the Intelligent Mind behind evervthing, and whv seek to confine the will of that Mind in creating, to one metlKxl ? Nature itself is full of diversity, and why should it be thought unlikely that a wide diversity of operations should have been active in creating that general o])ject and order, which the Creator had in view from the beginning ? Thus there is nothing to debar us from believing that amongst other agents of crea- tion something akin to Natural Selection and heredity, etc., may have been used as agents, tor the agents of creation are not described in the 20 general scheme of Revelation. What so many reasonably minded persons object to, is, that a perfectly unintelligent cause styled Natural Selec- tion, through its undesigned working, and without any object before it, should have been the great factor in creating effects which, in the overwhelm- ing majority of cases, are palpably characterized by object and order. But the main obstruction to Natural Selection, as the most important agent in Evolution, is found in its first act towards overleaping species, and com- mencing that series of variations which may result in a perfectly new species. Take for instance the commonly worked up case of a fish making the first step whereby it lays the foundation of that series of changes which results in the evolution of the frog. It is an easy thing for Haeckel to speak of Amphibia, which originated out of Gilled Amphibi- ians, by accustoming themselves in early life to breathe only through gills, and later in life " only through lungs," which lungs had been developed three stages previously in a fish that had become •• adapted to life on land," "^ whose swimming bladder had ]>een transformed into a lung, and nasal cavity into air passages." All this reads smoothly, but ordinary, intelligent men naturally enquire as to the first act which finally led to a fish " becoming adapted to life on land." What brought 21 the fish on hiinl ? It has ])een suggested that H came " in search of food," hut this as a newlM)rn instinct seems a most unlikely one; and ctM-tainly an unprofitalde one, for the food that the hind would supply to a fish accustomed to diet furnished h\' the sea, would not be likelv to l)e nutritious, digestible, or agreeable. If on the other liand it was Hung up on the shore l)y an angrv tide, is it reasonaldy pro})able that it would survive long enoujiih to be drawn back bv the returninir tide ? or if so, is it likely that it should be tlung back again and again until at last it would become '' adapted to life on land ?" Further, admittiuii such a sin«iular experience possible, what about the first act of striving to balance itself, and stand on fins? For the pectoral and ventral fins are as a rule singularly delicate organs, wholly unalde to bear the bulk weight of the body they are attached to, and if used as supporting organs would require a perfectly new instinct guiding their use ; for naturally a paired fin works simultaneously with the actiim of the tail, i.e., when the tail guides the body towards the right, the right pectoral ^\\\ acts in unison with it, the left remaining pressed close to the body. And this line of thought holds good in spite of the fact that certain fish, such as Blennies, possess tins adapted for walking on the sea bottom, no necessary reason being to hand to lead us to suppose that the first form of this description was not nuide to do so. 09 What strikes one, therefore, in this connection is that, under any imaginable circumstances connected with this first step, the fish, instead of presenting some fjivorable variation for Natural Selection to lav hold of. would he so unfavorably circumstanced that Natural Selection would have no room to work in at all. And yet everything connected with the evolution of a new species from the Hsh depends on this first step. The same may be said with regard to the first step connected with Mr. Darwin's theory as to the evolution of the eve. " A nerve comes to be sensi- tive to light. How, does not concern us.' But surely the fact of a nerve which never before was sensitive to light gradually or suddenly becoming sensitive would place the subject itself at a disad- vantage as compared with its fellows, who were perfectly free from the fiery neuralgic pains that in the nature of things it would be likely to undergo. If the subject could hold out, and create an advan- tage to itself that it might pass on to its children, other steps in evolution might take place ; but what possible advantage could a seriously inflamed nerve be to its possessor ? One could understand how a partially developed eye in the head ol a siuhtless creature would have certain limited advan- tages, and how an advanced eye would have greater advantages ; but the inflamed nerve, the initial eye state, cannot produce one solitary advantage, 2.S iuul coii.se«iuently would not he likely to be j^assed on. Mr. Darwin spreads the process of eye evolu- tion over '' nu'llions of years," so that we may allow at least a thousand vears for the inthuned nerve period, during which a succession of animals would be burn with inHamed nerves in their heads that would be perfectly objectless and useless, for the simple reason that in this initial stage it would not tend to produce an image. This same objection as to initial variation is to T)e found in almost every Held in whicli Njitural Selec- tion is claimed to be the main agent of Evolution. Everywhere the subject seems phiced at a disadvan- tage. Thus, it is perfectly true that the stripes on a tiger aid it in creeping on its i)rey and hiding from its enemies ; but would the initial marking have been an advantage ? Would it not rather have been a dangerous peculiarity, and, as such, a dis- advantage ? There are certain human birth-marks that often discolor the faces or necks of individuals. As compared with tlie whole skin of the body, such marks are mere spots, but these spots are so differ- ent from the ordinary appearance of the necks or faces of others, that one such marked man moving about in a crowd of people may easily be followed by the eye of an onlooker overlooking the crowd, simply because his appearance is peculiar. In the same way, initial marking on a tiger would mark it as peculiar, and its chances of life under many 24 conditions would be impaired rather than improved. Hence, Natural Selection does not seem to account for the final markino;s on anv animal where the initial markings would constitute a dangerous pecu- liaritv. CcHintless obstacles appear against the general principle of the working of Natural Selection in the evolution of complicated organs, the evolutionist doin«i- exactlv what he accuses the ])eliever in the miraculous of doing, i.e., taking for granted the power of the creative instrument. In Mr. Darwin's description ot the evolution of the eye, Natural Selection seems as if it were a person endowed not only with a perfect knowledge of organic needs, but owner of a storehouse of articles, out of which all these needs can be met. He speaks of Natural Selection as ''always intently watching each slight alteration in the transparent layers, and carefully preserving each which, under varied circumstances, or in any way or in any degree, tends to produce a distincter image." Fluid is needed to fill spaces, and it is provided ; layers of tissue of difterent den- sities and thicknesses require to Ije phued at differ- ent distances from each other, and they are so placed. And this aptness of chance provision runs through every organ claimed to have been perfected by Natural Selection ; the evolution proceeds, and as it does so its wants are manv, but thev are al- 25 ways met, and met so aptly that in time the oriran is perfect. THE LAW OF NATURAL PROTECTION' AND THE LAW OF EQUALIZATION. Mr. Darwin stakes the main work of the deveh)p- ment of life on Natural Selecti(jn. (liven the strug- gle for existence, the strong and the weak taking part in that struggle, the weak going to the wall, the strong selected to survive through Natural Selec- tion, and every s])ecies of animal and vegetahle life is accounted for [ii)art from Intelligence or Design in anv form. Now it is admitted that there is evil. ands(jrrow, and a struggle in the world, but such adniifrsions do not of necessity lead to the consequences claimed by evolutionists. For it is perfectly clear that Natural Selection is not an irresistible law, swee[)- ing on its ruthless course without let or hindrance, crushing to death what it regards as unfit to live, and preserving what it considers possessed of things favoralde to life, but one of manv laws, and like all laws bounded and circumscribed by the action of other laws. Admit that what is called the law of Natural Selection exists ; as an active power it is palpable that its undue iiiHuence is guarded against by the due action of at least two other laws (prob- ably many more), the law of Natural Protection, and the law of Equalization. 26 THE LAW OF NATURAL PROTECTION. In the law of Natural Protection, we see a power which steps right into the struggle for existence^ and instead of protecting the strong, seems ordered to protect the weak, that it may preserve and re- tain and keep them alive, and in so doing place a restraint on the ruthless working of Natural Selec- tion. In the brute creation the weak are constantly preserved by the instinct, bravery and strength of a powerful parentage. You may easily steal the weak and sickly whelp of the tiger while the mother is absent ; but will you dare to steal it with the raging form of the powerful beast crouching over it, and with the roar of the male tiger sound- ing through the jungle ? It is not alone in this and countless cases a question of the strength or weak- ness of the cub; it is the ([uestion of the united physical power and instinct of parentage, com[)iued aarainst you throuijh the whole of the brute crea- tion, and determined to resist you to the very death, before the stronii; will allow the weak to perish. And even in the adaptation of animals to their conditions of life, we see evidences of this law of Natural Protection over the weak, in spite of all Mr. Wallace's efforts to explain it away. In the tawny color of the lion, that roams over sandy deserts; in the white bear, that lives amongst eternal 27 snows ; in the yellow leaf, that is made 4;he home of the yellow insect ; in the soft, green leaf, the home of the soft, green caterpillar; in the leaf so like a butterfly that you cannot tell, in passing, which is leaf and which is Hy ; in the brown, rusty, bare twig that has sticking to it the brown, rusty, living creature, that looks at you as you pass, and that, if it could, might laugh at you, for the success of its mimicry which preserves it from your touch. I am well aware that such protective characteris- tics as the last mentioned are claimed by evolution- ists to be the result of Natural Selection, but, how- ever that law mav have been one of niiinv aijrentsin bringing about such results, it is clear that it can- not have been the main agent ; for Natural Selection cannot reasonably explain how the Canadi^.n rabbit and snow bird, the Arctic fox and ptarmigan are possessed of the power to change their colors to meet the seasons. Neither does Natural Selec- tion explain the fact of the chameleon varying its color to suit that of the position it happens to be in, or the fact that a number of Central African insects possess the power of imitating the grass or foliage on which they light, in all the varied tinting of forest hues — bright red, claret color, brilliant yel- low, tawny gold, dull yellow, etc. In such cases there nuist be some organic or deep-seated bodily intiuences at work, which enables the form to make 28 these changes, and a corresponding instinct which leads the form to make them. One can easily understand how a law like Natural Selection might improve a gift of this nature most materially, but it seems impossible to conceiv^e how it could be- stow it. Further, it seems necessary to hold that this law of Natural Protection must have been exercised over man himself. If we adopt the theory of evolutionists, the First Man becomes a trying puzzle. The law of Evolution could not give us r. perfect man. so mentally endowed as to be able to gather around him those weapons of defence and protection, which Avould have made him strong to resist the physically stronger. He must have been a lonelv, solitarv creature, surrounded bv deadlv foes in the animal world, and with cliinate and opportunities of obtaining food, suited to his new conditions, all auainst him. Midst the battle for existence, and under the law of Natural Selection, which selects the strong and rejects the weak, he ouiirht to have been literallv crushed out amxinst the wall as an unprofitable variety. But he, weak amidst the strong, survived and peopled a world. Then explain it also how you will : as civiliza- tion and education advance, the irresistible work- ing of Natural Selection is driven out before them everywhere. Even in lowest life, the hungry cry 29 of a starving child, gives energy to the foot of a strong made father in his hunt for food, and many a war path has been tracked through lonely forests, as the strong came to the rescue of the weak, to win back a stolen child, or save unharmed a timid girl. The weak would always go to the wall, save for the law which brings the strength of love, or the strength of muscle, or both combined, to the rescue of the weak ; so that the weak is as the strong, the dwarf is in one sense a giant, and the defenceless, irresistible. And this is still more apparent under the highest teachinii' of education and civilization. There is a mighty power in the world, ever increasing which only lives to protect the weak. A power that tends the sick, and builds the hospital, and trains the nurse, furnishes the free medicine, and provides the ablest skill. A power that lingers in tender minis- trations over the poorest of the poor, the weakest of the weak, the most loathsome of the disejised. A poW' er that teaches us that evil is to be remedied by love and gentleness and pity ; that the weak are not of necessity to die of weakness, or the poverty-stricken to die in a ditch, because of poverty, or climate, or want of food ; or through uncared for debility and wretchedness. This power may be called Judaism, Christianity, Morality — anvthinsr; but it exists and works, and the wider 30 its area and the stronger its strength, the less room remains for the workings of Natural Selection, which onlv exists to crush out the weak and enable the hand of a man to snatch from the hand of a woman the last crust, that fairly divided might preserve the lives of both. Where man is uncivilized the care of the weak runs as far as love and family relationship run, and sometimes is wholly absent with reference to the aged. In such a state of society Natural Selection might have a large field to work in, for the young,, strong and well fed would possess great advantas^es. But where civilization exists the care of the weak becomes a national characteristic, and cities abound with Medical, Surgical, Maternity, Ophthalmic, Cancer, Consumptive, Contagious hospitals, meant wholly for the preservation of the weak, and with Lunatic, Blind, Deaf and Dumb and Orphan Asylums, Homes and Alms-houses for the aged poor, and a number of other institutions all carried on in the interests of the weak and the degraded, in the interests of that very class that Natural Selection, left to itself, would kill, or that the law of E(jualization, left to itself, would palpably reduce. For although to a limited degree Natural Selection may work in an hospital, the gain arising from the highest skill brought to bear on the death rate of the weak is wholly on the side of a class of 31 life that, left to itself, would go to the wall ; in other words the greatest barrier to Natural Selec- tion is that noblest of all earthly professions — the Medical, and the higher its perfection in patho- logical, medical and surgical skill, the more crippled and confined the action of Natural Selection amongst the sons of men. THE LAW OF EQUALIZATION. In tie law of Equalization we see another power which steps right into the struggle ^oy existence and impedes the law of Natural Selection, bv equalizing the chances of life or death, thus ])iinging the strong and the weak to an unmistak- able level. In a limited pamphlet of this descrip- tion it would be impossible to give full details of the working of this law, but the author can assure his readers that its working is as palpable amongst all classes of life as is the claimed working of Natural Selection. In reviewing the methods by which death comes to various forms of microscopic life, apart from age or disease, one finds three methods, each of which bring the chances of life for improved and unimproved varieties to an equality. 1st. Wherever death becomes imminent to smaller forms, through their getting into strong ciliary currents, which convey them as food to the mouths or orifices of larger forms, death seeks the strono* and Aveak, the healthv and sicklv, the best :J2 fitted and the worst fitted alike. Careful «tudy of the action of ciliary currents proceeding from a form like that of a Rotifer, proves clearly that as a rule " there is no escape in that war," and that in exceptional cases where there is a chance of escape, the smaller and lighter forms on the margin of the current appear to be more likely to get free than the stronger, on the principle that in a river a chip is often stranded when a log is carried for- ward. The same principle holds true of the Rotalia and forms that seek food by threadlike protrusions of their bodies through shell orifices. As the threads of such forms are thrust into the water it is impossible to say what improved or unimproved form of animal or vegetable microscopic life the}^ may come in contact with ; hence the improved and unimproved run exactly the same chances of escape or death. 2nd. The second form of death is equally out- side of discrimination, /. e., death arising from fish feeding on the green substance covering stones and rocks in rivers, streams and pools, which substance is, according to the season, filled with Philodinae, Vorticellii?, Melicerta% Stentors, etc. Here the methods of fish feeding are wholly destructive of any kind of selection. Tadpoles, catfish, etc , browse over a given space till they clear out every- thing, and then move to another space, whilst 33 cliul), minnow, etc., Jis ii rule tear off sections and -trips teeming with life and bolt them wholesale. ord. The third method of death arises from the sudden or gradual evaporation of the water in which microscopic forms live. Here there is hut little chance of escape save for forms possessed of the power of maintaining life under dry conditions (encysting) or for smaller forms. If an ordinary microscopic slide be evaporated it will be found, as ;i rule, the smaller the form the greater the cfiance ot life, for large and powerfid representatives of iwiy species quickly melt out of existence, whilst smaller forms of the same species continue lively and vigorous, the last to melt out being the smallest. Hence it may be claimed that, as far as general microscopic life is concerned, there are at least three ^\ idespread methods of death, wdiicli in some cases wholly paralyze, and in others materially limit the Avorking of Natural Selection, by reducing the chances for strong and weak to an equality, or if there be selection, selecting the Aveak. The same law plainly applies to a wide field of Ivadiate life, to those forms which cannot be said always to seek their food, but to whom it is largely brought. Such as sea urchins, star tish, sand stars, 8ea slugs, sand swallowers, sea baskets, etc. Wide as is the field of insectivorous life, there u are few if jiny depjirtnients of it in wliich thin law of equalization may not in some sense ])e seen work- ing, and wherever it works it paralyzes or limits Natural Selection. Wliat will the fate of the fittest to survive be in the foliage of oak, beech, or poplar, when cockchafers leave the trees as bare as if they bad never budded? or what prospect of survival is there for the fittest in any vegetable form when the birva' of locusts, grasshoi)pers, etc., are hatched out and in their winged state begin their career of destruc- tion ? or what advantage has an improved gnat over an unimproved, as the dragon-tly suddenly swoops into a cloud of gnats ? In the case of the deadly tsetse-Hy of Africa, which works in defined belts, if there be any discrimination, it seems likely 1 it works against the strong, for it follows the largei" game ard disappears with them. But there does not seem to be selection in personal attack, for, ac- cording to Livingstone, weak and strong alike suffer ; and the same may be said of the attacks of whame and gad-Hies. Then manv cases mav be cited where, as far as life is concerned, a favt^rable varietv of lower forms useful as food to Mollusks is in no better position than an unfavora])le. In scallops, oysters, mussels, cockles, etc., the gill fringes are covered with ciliti or hair- like processes, which by constant vibration create powerful and rapid currents, wliich, sweeping 35 over the entire surface of the j;ills, hurry towards the mouth, iu a perfectly indiscriminate manner, the living food supply. In the case of the Periwinkle, it grazes on marine pastures as cattle on land, feed- ing straight on, and swallowing evervthinu within a given space, and in the case of the Northern Clio the almost countless suckers on its tentacles prove clearlv that it is formed to make an indiscriminate onslaught on the tiny creatures forming its food supply. The methods of gaining food characteristic of Fishes seem at first sight to support the hypothesis of the strong destroying the weak, for unipiestion- ahly a large proportion of the food supply of fishes is furnished hy weaker forms of fish, Le.^ fish feed on fish. But then as a rule thev feed indiscriniin- ately, a method that destroys the chances of improved varieties of fish, forming food supply, escaping. Mackerel in feediu": follow schools of herrinii' frv, and swallow wholesale, and cimger eels, sturgeon, the white shark, etc., are such voracious eaters, that thev will swallow almost anvthinu". Though whales, porpoises, etc., cannot be classified as fish, jet for temporary convenience they may here be regarded as such. In the case ot the Greenland or Right whale, the destruction of life for food is not only indiscriminate but is enormous, one single mouthful meaning a rush of water that engulphs 36 thousands of crustaceans and i)terojK)ds, and as the Riii:ht whale seeks out shoals of these forms the wholesale destruction can scarcely l)e computed, and nuich the same may be said of the Rcxjuail and other whales, which feed mainly on s([uid and the smaller forms of cuttle Hsh. Porpoises also follow shoals of mackerel, pilchards and herring, swallowing indis- criminately a mass of struggling life, and Dolphins feed in the same voracious manner on crustaceans and fish One might as well speak of an improved variety of man having a chance over an unimproved in the rapids of Niagara, as of the chances of an im- proved fish when any of these larger forms swim through a shoal of small-fish life, filling and refill- ing their mouths as they proceed. How far Birds exercise a choice in food materinl is open to question, but it is plain that, in many cases, no choice exists, and consequently the chances of life are equal as far as the prey of such birds are con- cerned. As the giant condor soars over a flock of fleeced vicunas ; as owls make their sudden and silent foray on nests of young birds ; as the night jar wings its way through a flight of moths ; as the woodpecker clears the bark of a tree of the hidden insect life beneath it ; as seed and grain eating birds consume indiscriminately, one finds it hard to fancy how under such circumstances Natural Selection could ever act. 87 III the wide field of Miiiniiialian life this law of ecjiiul chances \n also apparent, the haliits of many of the carnivora, as th«»y seek for prey, precluding the influence of selection. As a rule, none of the great Cat family hunt or select their prey, hut, lying in coveit close to spots where other aninuils resort, spring from their concealment and deliver the death blow suddenly. When a liungry lion springs over the thorny wall of a zereha, it often leaps on the animal it kills, and having gaineit what is essentially chance prey, releaps the enclosure with its prey in its mouth. In the tiger, its lying in wait is palpable. It has no idea what prey may come within its reach ; it waits and takes what comes. In short, of all these animals the chance of prey escaping through keenness of siirht or swift- ness of foot is almost impossible, 0:1 account of the cunning of the animal in hiding and the rapidity of its attack. When we come to Man, we reach Mind, and may consequently look for selection in food supply, but, unfortunately for Natural Selection, Man will always select the best for consumption, not the weakest. The kitchen middens of Denmark, com- posed of oysters, cockle, periwinkle and mussel shells, prove very clearly that primitive man made a selection, but if he did, the best perislied and the weakest survived. It is clear also from the nets I 38 jind hooks used by the lake-dwellers of Switzerland that they made their hooks large, and their nets wide meshed, in order to kill the very forms that Natural Selection would have preserved, i.e., the strongest and best developed. Then there are methods of obtaining food characteristic of savages, that if they do not destroy the best, bring strong and weak to an equal level of death or escape. Australian savages will sur- round a aiven space of bushland and drive great and small prey to the centre, where they slaughter them indiscriminately. Amongst some South American Indians fish is killed by throwing the narcotic euphorbia into deep pools, bringing all within the pools to the surface, and Chinook Indians draw salmon within reach of their spears by waving torches. In both these cases, narcotic and torch alike are instruments to bring about a wholesale, or chance harvest of the fish within reach. Apart from early man and his food supply, one can see many ways in which the exercise of his will blocks the action of Natural Selection in the onward and upward development of the race itself Sparta unquestionably helped the work of Natural Selection by training strong women to become the mothers of strong children, but its success as a l)reeder of physically powerful men was only a 39 (juestion of time, as it must always^ be with any nation that surrenders the tiower of its manhood to war. No nation can e great vjirieties, but a distinct existence having no hereditary contact with any other species, or as Linnanis wrote, ''there are as many different species as there were different forms created in the beffinnino: bv the Infinite Beinu." This view Evolution rejects, holding the position that species has never been a stable state of exist- 1 Haeckel, Histy. of Creation, v. 1, p. 41. 41 ence, but has always been capable through varia- tions in structure, etc., of producing in long lapses of time perfectly new species; in short, that all ap- parently defined species as they exist are de- scended ^^from a single or a fev/ primary forms " Now, not a few intelligent people cannot accept this view, primarily for the reason already men- tioned, i.e., that to all appearance nature seems to have divided life into species. It has ever struck thoughtful minds so, and until late years the idea has not been seriously objected to; indeed, Haeckel admits that '* the primary nomenclature of Linnaeus is still universally applied by all zoologists and botanists, and will, no doubt, maintain itself, for a long time to come, with undiminished author- ity." ^ It seems, then, but reasonable that be- fore uprooting an idea of this nature, that the evidence produced agaijist it should be not only of a most decisive character, but that it should also be supported by a vast number of widespread cases in favor of the newer idea. Many who cannot receive the instability of species are well aware of the cases relied on by evolutionists in favor of the position that varieties of one species are " the incipient " elements of a perfectly new species,- how the species of fuschia, petunia, calceolaria, etc.. have been crossed, how 1 Histy. of Creation, vol. 1, 40. '- Origin of Species, 8(> 42 the offspring of two distinct moths remained fertile for eight generations, how the hare and rabbit, under certain conditions, are fertile ; but they nevertheless feel that, even supposing such cases to be positively verified, much yet remains to be explained be- fore the stability of species can be surrendered. Thus, not a few think that even some of the special cases mentioned need further investigation, for if Mr. Darwin states that " two such distinct species as the hare and rabbit produce fertile offspring," Mr. De Quatreftiges states '^ that the experiment of uniting rabbits and hares has been tried thousands of times all over the world and the experiment is said to have succeeded twice. "^ But apart from such claimed cases, it is perfectly plain that a general law of Nature seems to pre- clude members of two distinct sjoecies being success- fully married ; and that, where such union takes place, it is as a rule incapal^le of producing a per- manent family ; indeed that where such unions are attempted, "' in the immense majority of cases the marriage is sterile," or where fertile the offspring either cannot reproduce, as in the case of the mule, and the hinny, or the reproductive powers weaken as time advances and die out in a few generations, as in the case of the union of the canary with the goldfinch. Indeed, Mr. Wallace freely states this ^ " Natural History of Man., p. 24. - Darwinism, p. 1.52. 43 when writing on the infertility of crosses between two species, striving to overcome the difficulty by somewhat carelessly speaking of '* the vast mass of evidence." on the other side gathered by Mr. Darwin, which evidence, he claims, goes to prove that the infertility of two species is not a fixed law. This statement is directly contradicted ])y De Quatreftiges in these words : " I might here accumu- late a mass of analogous facts and details. But over them all would appear a great general fact includ- ing them, which is the expression of a law, and here is this fact : notwithstandiuir observations reaching back for thousands of years, and made on hundreds of species, we do not yet know a single example of intermediate species obtained by the crossing of animals belonging to difterent species ;" in other words, '' infertility is the law where animals of different species unite." ^ On the other hand, where different varieties of the same species unite, such crossings are singularly fertile, save where the relationship of varieties is very close and the unions repeated constantly in that close relationship. And this fact seems to many to account largely for the rich and varied differences that often exist between animals of the same kind, between tho racer and the curt horse, the deer-like Jersey and wild cattle ; for, although in such cases much is due to the skill of man, still the secret after 1 Natural History of Man, 2-5. 44 all lies ill the acts of progressive breeding within the bounds of one species. This fact De Quatrefages expresses in the follow- ing words : '^ An animal or vegetable may vary within certain limits, but the dog remains a dog, whatever its general form, its size, its hair ; and the pear remains a pear, whatever its size, its savor, and the colour of its skin." And these varieties mav be transmitted to such an extent *^ that individuals of the same species cease to resemble each other in an absolute manner," but, " the dog remains a dog whatever its modifications." ^ Sir William Dawson takes the ^ume position. He says : '' It must be admitted that no case has been ascertained in which an individual of one species has transgressed the limits betw^een it and other species. However extensive the varie- ties produced by artificial breeding, the essential character of the species remains, and even its minor characters may be reproduced ; while the barriers establishea in nature between species, by the laws of tlieir production, seem to be absolute." '" 111 the lijrht of this contradictorv evidence furnished by leading scientific authorities, it is not unnatural that manv fairlv intellioent men should not see tlieir way to adopt readily the statement that species is, and ever has been, a fluctuating 1 Natural History of Man, p. 16. - istory of Earth and Man, p. 328. 45 state of life. Scientifically, it is yet plainly an unsettled question, with a great deal to be said against it. But if it is not settled, then the purely hypothetical character of all that is claimed for Evolution becomes apparent ; for if species is not capable of breaking through its specific bounds, and in so doing creating new species, then Natural Selection can only work within species, and form new varieties of the species it works in, which, though not proved, is not impossible. THE OBSTACLE OF CHANGELESS SPECIES. Mr. Darwin admits that in microscopic life, the Rhizopods and Infusoria, " have remained for an enormous period in nearh/ their present state." ^ Fossils of Rhizopods have been found in the Lower Silurian era," and the chalk of the Cretaceous period is made mostly from their minute calcareous shell."' The Hornstone of the Devonian period is made up of microscopic organisms of the same families as exist to-day, just as beautiful, perfect and finished in design as the living objects that we behold in microscopic studies,* or, as Mr. Darwin describes them, '• things of wondrous and beautiful organi- zation." Mr. Darwin explains this crucial point by assum- ing that lowly forms have been preserved through inhabiting " confined stations," where they have 1 Origin of Species, 99. 2 Dana, 85. ^ Dana, 191. ^ Dana, IW. 46 heen subject to '' less severe competition," or, that in some cases, a high organization would be of no service, and that diflerences might never have arisen for Natural Selection to act on. ^ But surely, if the telegraphic plateau between Ireland and Newfoundland supports a continuous bed of stone, a thousand miles in breadth, mainly formed out of Khizopod remains," it seems hardly fair to assume that Rhizopod life existed within •* a confined station " or was subject to a " less severe competi- tion " than larger organisms. Neither is the pre- sumption just, that lower life, because it is minute, is devoid of a comparatively high organization, for Mr Darwin admits that the P]ozoon of tlie lower Laurentian is a " highly organized " member of the group of Protozoa.'^ The history and existence of Diatomacese are also hard points for evolutionists to explain. For fossil diatoms have been found in the lower strata of the Tertiary formation, and the fossil genera and species are in all respects to the most minute details identical with the numerous living repre- sentatives of their class.* Mr. Darw in does not devote much thought to the renowned moUusk, the Lingula. He admits that the geological Lingula of the lower Silurian 1 Origin of Species, 99-100. 2 Dana, 205. =' Origin of Species, 287. * Encycl. Brit. " Diatomaceae," O'Meara, vol. 71. Dana's Geology, 210. Tlie Microscope, Carpenter, 326-328. 47 " does not differ iiiaterially from living (existing) species," ^ but he does not notice this antagonistic point as carefully as others. The fact is, that the Lingula of the lower Silurian is the Lingula of rhe Permian period, and the Lingula of both ages is practically the same Lingula that to-day clings to the rocks of the Indian Archipelago." For *' the Lingula of the Cambrian rocks is but very little, if at all, different from the existing Lingula, and it has indeed been considered doubtful by some authors whether even specific characters could be assigned to distinguish some of the earlier from the later forms, separated by an interval of millions of years." '^ The same persistence of type is repre- sented in the Genus Discina. CONCLUSION. Tlie foregoing reasons for not believing in Evolu- tion constitute by no means the whole case against the hypothesis^ but they are reasons present in the minds of intelligent people that cannot be answered by the arrogance or superciliousness of a class of evo- lutionists who regard every person that may differ from them as ignorant and wholly unacquainted with the hypothesis. The advance of real science can never be aided by such rash and unwarranted assertions. 1 Origin of Species 293. - JDana, 81. ■' Distribution of Animals, Heilpron, 137. 48 Whatever is true in science will ever come to the front of ts own native force, and needs not the paltriness of innuendo or open or veiled invectives to speed it on its way. It has been said that *' theology is a grave-yard of dead doctrines " ; and however false, such a statement leads to the thought that " science is a grave-yard of dead hypotheses." But science is not dead. Hypothesis after hypo- thesis might perish, but there has scarce ever been one that did not contri])iite something to the great advance, as calm, peaceful and undisturbed the Truth went on its way. And so it will ever be. There are few (questions that have not two sides to them ; time alone can settle on which the weight of truth lies. Give time, and truth must come. And when it comes, it will come as a fact that all will receive, though stripped it may be of a thousand fancies that heralded its birth.