1S96.] -L-l-L [Bailey— Brintou. 



selves changing. In the second place, we know that there must be an in- 

 tense struggle for existence amongst all forms of life ; that the result of 

 this struggle for existence must be adaptation to the organic environment. 

 Again, another line of proof that evolution is true is the classiflcatory 

 verification. The very fragment of the tree of life whicli Prof. Cope has 

 put upon the board is an evidence that there are converging histories of 

 animals, or, in other words, that there are relationships. But tlie proof 

 which appeals to me most stronglj' is the fact that gardeners and breeders 

 have it in their power to make new forms and that they have been making 

 them since man began to deal with plants and animals. The palseontolo- 

 gical and embryological records do not appeal to me with such force as 

 the experiences of breeders and gardeners, who for ages have been modi- 

 fying plants and animals almost to suit their will. This, of course, sug- 

 gests that I am not skilled in the sciences of paleontology and embryology; 

 but have given more attention to gardening. 



I assume that you all believe in evolution. Heredity is not a necessary 

 attribute of the theories of evolution. It is a matter for the physiologists 

 and the embryologists to discuss rather than for one who looks broadly at 

 nature and tries to discover some of the general and fundamental facts 

 which have determined the onward progress of creation. I wish to call 

 your attention to the facts of the origin of differences. I speak of differ- 

 ences rather than of variations. 



Dr. D. G. Brinton made the following remarks : 



We have listened with interest to this able exposition of the principles 

 of evolution from three eminent scholars approaching it from different 

 points of view. The question proposed, however, was one which was 

 intended to go beyond the mere facts of natural science. Facts are not 

 factors. The word means something more, something deeper. When we 

 have these series of facts laid before us, however interesting they may be, 

 they do not themselves express the primary law of evolution, but are 

 merely a number of incidents illustrative of it. Therefore I think that the 

 first speaker in his clear descriptions of the palceontologic evolutionary 

 claims gave us little information as to the factors which brought them 

 about. 



We shall no doubt grant, as was urged by the second speaker, that 

 there are extrinsic and intrinsic factors of evolution ; but what he 

 advanced as extrinsic factors were again series of external facts, and his 

 intrinsic factors were series of Internal facts or processes. The law by 

 virtue of which they acted upon organic forms so as to produce a varying 

 morphology was not, it seems to me, definitely stated. 



By the third speaker the doctrine of evolution has been put forward as 

 a sort of religious dogma of the scientific church. For myself, I cannot 

 look upon it in that light. I believe I caught his words correctly when I 

 quote him as saying that evolution holds good " from beginning to finish 



