18 



are at the present time, and with no intermediate links, but we find special 

 genera, just as distinct from the other genera as their descendants or pre- 

 sent representatives are from the different genera which are nowadays found 

 on the earth. For instance, we cannot for a moment doubt, when we 

 regard the first appearance afforded us of the tulip-tree, that in it we recog- 

 nise the same tulip-tree as now exists, just as we also recognise in the stu- 

 pendous lizards of the past the same type of lizards we see now. No one 

 doubts that the creatures whose fossil remains we find were lizards. Even 

 the uncultivated countryman, or those not so learned as the countryman in 

 objects of natural history, would recognise the essential characteristics of 

 the early tulip-tree. Do any of us who grow roses know how impossible it 

 is to classify roses? In this case we have a singularly plastic genus, 

 capable of cultivation into almost infinite varieties, and yet the result is always 

 a rose. We never find a rose developing into anything other than a rose, 

 and yet, within the limits of variation, the variety is almost infinite. If 

 there were no strict lines within which nature is confined, why should not 

 all species of plants be simply varieties of one original, such as we see in the 

 case of the rose ? and why should there not be intermediate links which are 

 now absent ? It is only by the familiar study of plants that we are able to 

 appreciate the force of this argument ; but the argument, in its main out- 

 lines, appears to me to be one which any person who knows anything of 

 nature may readily follow, and one also which it would be well to pursue, 

 not merely to the extent to which this paper carries it, but even further, in 

 order that we may be the better able to understand the marvels of creation ; 

 for it is evident that nothing but a creative power could have caused the 

 differentiations we see around us. If it be said of evolution that it has 

 taken place very rapidly at one period, and very slowly at another, that, 

 in point of fact, it has proceeded by fits and starts, we may very fairly 

 exclaim, That is quite another matter ; and here I would broadly say that, if 

 this is what is meant, then we may assert that evolution is simply claimed 

 as a form of creation which as much requires the exercise of a creative 

 power as any other form of creation. It is impossible for us to consider in 

 what forms creative energy can be exhibited, or to limit its possibilities 

 but such an evolution as this undoubtedly demands a creative energy just 

 as much as is needed by any form of belief in creative power. In saying 

 this, I must not be supposed to deny that, even if the gradual process of 

 evolution were proved, it would just as much require creative energy to 

 account for it as is needed by any other form of creative power. The result 

 is that, do what they will, the evolutionists are utterly unable to escape from 

 the necessity of a Creator ; and, therefore, the question is not a vital one 

 for the theist. I will conclude by saying that, in the interests of truth 

 and sound knowledge, papers like this are invaluable as a means of bringing 

 to book those modern theories which are very popularly expounded, but 

 which it is found very difficult accurately to prove. (Applause.) 

 Captain FRANCIS PETRIE, F.G.S. (Hon. Secretary). Before this discussion 



