CORRESP ONDENCE. 



123 



sive periods of time, and only during these 

 periods of time." 



Although Professor Huxley does not 

 speak of vegetation, yet, undoubtedly, he 

 would include it also in his statement, and 

 therefore I venture to bring that, too, into 

 the discussion, and add, in accordance with 

 his central idea : The species which compose 

 the present vegetable kingdom originated 

 in one distinct period of time preceding the 

 three animal populations, and only in that 

 one period of time. 



As this " central idea " certainly has no 

 existence in science, the only question of 

 interest is : Does it exist in Genesis ; or is 

 it an interpolation of Professor Huxley's ; 

 or, rather, is it an unfounded tradition 

 which he has too readily adopted ? I read 

 in Genesis i that at a certain time the earth 

 " brought forth grass, the herb yielding seed, 

 and the fruit-tree bearing fruit whose seed 

 is in it." * Professor Huxley's central idea 

 adds, " And there were no plants before 

 these." The first is true, the last is false. 



Again, I read that at a certain time the 

 waters swarmed with water-creatures, amomr 

 which were " whales," and every kind of 

 moving creature, which the waters brought 

 forth abundantly, and fowls that were to fly 

 in the air. That is all, and it is true. But 

 Professor Huxley's central idea adds, "And 

 before whales and fowl there was no form 

 of animal life," an addition which is false. 



Further on I read that, subsequent to the 

 plants and animals named, the earth brought 

 forth cattle, beasts, and creeping things. 

 This also is true. Professor Huxley's " cen- 

 tral idea" adds, "And before them there 

 were no land-animals of any kind." Another 

 falsehood. 



Where the account is simply silent, Pro- 

 fessor Huxley fills the hiatus, and then says, 

 in substance: How unworthy of scientific 

 notice ; how false three statements in a 

 few lines, important ones too, which every 

 geologist knows are not true ! It is clear 

 that the story is a myth. 



It may be said True, Moses does de- 

 scribe modern species, but here is where 

 his error lies. He intended to describe the 

 beginning of organic life, and, instead, has 

 described only the latest. If so, he built 

 more wisely than he knew. Intending to 

 state what geologists now know would have 

 been false, he has, in fact, stated what they 

 know to be true. It seems to me that his 

 intention was to say that all things were 

 made by God, and, looking around on the 

 universe, he names what he saw the heav- 

 ens, the light, the firmament, the land and 

 seas, the sun, moon, and stars, the vege- 

 table and animal world then in existence. 



* Eevised Version says, v. 12 : "And the earth 

 brought forth grass, herb yielding seed after its 

 kind and tree bearing fruit, wherein is the seed 

 thereof after its kind." 



These, or rather their coming into being, he 

 names in a certain order. All, save the last 

 two, are not mentioned in Professor Hux- 

 ley's article, but they are the basis of his 

 indictment ; it is therefore eminently proper 

 to see what are the facts of our world's his- 

 tory pertaining to the advent of life, and 

 how they accord with the three statements 

 in Genesis. 



" The following propositions " I quote 

 from Professor Huxley's tenth " Lay Ser- 

 mon" " are regarded by the mass of pale- 

 ontologists as expressing some of the best- 

 established results of paleontology " : 



" Animals and plants began their exist- 

 ence together, and these succeeded each 

 other in such a manner that totally dis- 

 tinct faunae and flora; occupied the whole 

 surface of the earth, one after the other, 

 and during distinct epochs of time. 



" A geological fauna or flora is the sum 

 of all the species of animals or plants which 

 occupied the surface of the globe during 

 one of the epochs." 



I add : a geological horizon * is the sum 

 of all the species of plants and animals of 

 one of those epochs. There were many 

 horizons as many as epochs. Professor 

 Dana makes upward of fifty (" Manual of 

 Geology," pp. 142, 143). I note a few which 

 are of peculiar importance, either in them- 

 selves or in relation to this account. 



In the earliest are found traces of ma- 

 rine plants only, and of the lowest forms of 

 animal life (an Archaean horizon). 



In another, perhaps a million years later, 

 radiates, mollusks, and articulates are found, 

 while sea-weeds are the highest type of 

 plants. 



Another million or so of years brings us 

 to the Upper Silurian, where are found a 

 few land-plants, but among them no fruit- 

 trees. 



Another vast stretch brings a Devonian 

 horizon, with more land-plants, but no such 

 flora as Moses describes. There were fishes, 

 but neither "whales" nor "fowl." 



Long after this came the Carboniferous 

 period, with water-animals and land-animals, 

 and an abundant flora. Still, there were no 

 fruit-trees, nor were there whales in the 

 seas or cattle on the land. 



Later, again, in the Tertiary, we find a 

 flora exactly answering to that in Genesis, 

 containing, as it does, grasses, herbs, and 

 fruit-trees with the seed in the fruit i. e., 

 angiosperms, including in that term palms. 

 As to the animals of this horizon, there 

 were then fishes, birds, and mammals, but 

 not of living species. Professor Dana, 

 (" Manual of Geology," revised edition, page 

 518), says, " All the fishes, birds, reptiles, 

 and mammals of the Tertiary are extinct." 

 These, therefore, were not the fauna of 



* " On the same horizon * is said of the fossils 

 and strata of one age. " Imperial Dictionary." 



