vast periods of time, and necessitating the intervention of all conceivable links. That is, they all rest against the theories which appeal solely to external influences, like those of De Maillet and Darwin, etc. . . . . The principle of natural selection, or survival of the fittest, it ought to be remarked, though inadequate to account for the origin of new forms, may be legitimately appealed to for their preservation when produced by any adequate means. Viewing specific types as absolutely constant, with a limited elasticity, it may undoubtedly be regarded the principle of the survival of the fittest which maintains the species at the healthful standard of normal vigor."* On page 49 he says: "The Lamarckian theory of inherent appetency is little insisted on at the present day; and unmodified Darwinism, it may be added, has fallen into disrepute. Neither Huxley, nor Parsons, nor Mivart, nor even Wallace, one of its original propounders, accepts the doctrine in its integrity," etc. Darwinism, then, has had its day, like many another once popular ism and ology. It has been succeeded by a number of rivals for popularity, each evolutionist having an improved theory of his own. But none of them has equaled Mr. Darwin in presenting a multitude of facts in pleasant popular style, nor in dressing up fictions as plausible presumptions; and so none of them has achieved anything like his popularity. If the preceding view of the difficulties of the theory has satisfied my readers that Darwinism is an untenable hypothesis, I do not suppose they will try to lasso another horse out of that band, for Darwin's is the best of the drove; and we see how he has stumbled and thrown his rider. It is needless to discuss improvements in the saddle when the rider has broken his neck. I have not glanced at all at the difficulties connected The Doctrine of Evolution, p. 79. with the evolution of man, nor at the moral and religious problems raised by the survival of the fittest as the law of society. These we hope to consider hereafter. The failure of natural selection leaves us in possession of the Bible account of creation; that "God created the beast of the earth after his kind, cattle and creeping things of the earth after their kind;" birds, and fishes, and the great geological monsters, after their kind; and they continue as He created them. The death of Darwinism leaves us also in undisputed possession of all the evidence of the wisdom and goodness of God which Christian philosophers have delighted to discover in the beautiful contrivances of the structures of plants and animals. That result is worth contending for. In the struggle for existence God still lives, and shall live, even in the principle of the survival of the fittest. It would be a poor exchange for the struggling world of working men to accept Natural Selection instead of our Father in heaven. "The heavens declare Thy glory, Lord, In every star thy wisdom shines; The rolling sun, the changing light, And night and day thy power confess; But the blest volume Thou hast writ Agricola, 94. INDEX. American Cyclopedia, 38. Atheistic conceit and guess work, Atlantic Ocean's depth and tempera- Comte's mathematical forgery, 33, Correlation of forces, 49. Crust of the earth, its thickness,124. Darwinism, 201. Darwin a believer in Christianity, Density of Solar System, 34. Early Fathers on Evolution, 206. Buffon, 99. Bunsen's discoveries, 61, 64. Eternal freeze-up, 112. Eternity of matter, 56. Equlibrium of forces, 52. Burnet, Theory of the Earth, 96, 97. Evolu tion, its pedigree, 170; Tyn- dall, 162; McCosh, 270; Spencer, Falloppio, 94. Forbes, David, 122. Gay Lussac on earthquakes, 120. Geology, history and pedigree of, 83. | Maha Yug, 88. 123, 125. Goodwin, C. W., 105. Gospel of despair, 109, 110. Haeckel, 165. Hall, Prof. James, 123. 116. Herschel, Wm., Nebulous fluid, 70. Hooker, Prof., 246. Hopkins, on earth's crust, 126. Humboldt, design in the solar sys- Ignorance of earth's materials, 150. Maxwell, Prof. Clerk, molecules,75. Mivart, St. George, 231; Rejects Molecules manufactured, 74, 75. Moses, his reticence concerning cos- Mountain making, various pro- Natural selection a failure, 238. Nebular Hypothesis, a new theory, Neo-Platonists, 175. Neptunists and Vulcanists, 100. New Creation, 112. North British Review, 107, 248. Origin of species, 201. Owen, Prof., 207. Pedigree of Evolution, 170. Predictions of geological prophets, Primitive forms the largest and Pwanku chiseling out the heavens, Rattlesnake's rattle, 261. |