1888. | NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 161 
the geological record. Hesays: ‘‘ The results of such succes- 
sional (embryonic) metamorphoses are expressed in geological 
history by more or less abrupt transitions, rather than by uni- 
formly gradual successions.” It is difficult to avoid the belief 
that, but for theoretical reasons, biologists, in reference to new 
species, would almost adopt the motto, Natura semper facit sal- 
tum. Be this as it may, evolution gives us no aid in accounting 
for the changes. The survival of the fittest, however important 
in determining what varieties shall survive, gives no assistance 
in determining how and why the variations occurred. As Prof. 
Huxley well says: ‘‘ What the hypothesis of evolution wants is 
a good theory of variation.” At present it can be attributed to 
nothing more definite than ‘‘some cause unknown to science.” 
Miracles are equally well explained in the same way. 
The believer in the Bible will ask: ‘‘ But does not this con- 
flict with the story of creation in Genesis? If Genesis be true, 
is it possible that present species of animals are descended from 
older species, and back through many steps to the first stages of 
life upon our globe?” But wherein is the contradiction ? 
Genesis says only that God made, or created, the various crea- 
tures named. As to how He did it, there is absolute silence, 
hence, as to the mode of bringing into existence, contradiction 
is impossible. 
The chief interest most persons have in evolution pertains to 
man’s origin. As to his higher part, the soul, few will be found 
to deny that it came direct from God. 
The doubt is as to his body. Did God form it directly from 
the ground and atmosphere, moulding the mixture to his pur- 
pose, and then give it life? Or did He take, in embryo, or after 
birth, some animal nearest to his design, and enlarge its form, 
shorten the length of its arms, change its hand-like feet till 
fitted for man’s upright position, and enlarge the capacity of the 
skull to fit it for the large brain which was to be the facile in- 
strument of the soul, the go-between of the soul and the body ? 
Whichever really was the mode of man’s creation, there can be, 
I think, no doubt that the latter is most in harmony with 
Christ’s methods when exercising His power in the miracles. 
And as for the question of dignity, surely matter which under 
the divine hand had been prepared and refined in all the infi- 
nitely delicate machinery of a living body, though that of a 
brute, was, to say the least, as worthy of man as that which had 
never since its creation received the divine touch, but had lain, 
raw and crude, beneath the feet of man’s predecessors. 
Then there is the creation of Eve. God undoubtedly might 
have made her as he did Adam. But in accordance with the 
law that runs through the miracles, it would seem probable that 
