EVIDENCE OF DESIGN. 125 
Such is the condition of evolutionistic thought to-day. 
That there is no direct evidence for organic evolution is 
generally admitted. That geology cannot be quoted for 
it is also quite generally conceded, since the sudden rise 
of perfect (not half-developed) insects, of perfect fish, 
of perfect mammals, is clear even to the man who merely 
turns the leaves of Geikie’s, Le Conte’s, and Dana’s text 
books, or visits Field’s Museum. Yet some-how things 
must have gotten to be what they are by development 
from earlier forms,—this about sums up what is really 
contained in the concept of evolution as it appears in most 
recent scientific literature, so far as scientists at all touch 
upon the subject. However, they by no means urge the 
evolutionary principle as they used to do. Bacteriolo- 
gists especially, so I am informed by a chemist of in- 
ternational repute, Dr. P. A. Kober, of New York, as a 
class are inclined to give up the theory as a “‘bad guess.” 
Why, they find in fossil fish diseased portions which bear 
unmistakable traces of the action of bacteria which live 
to-day, in other words, which in “countless millions of 
years” have not progressed enough to show any change 
recognizable under the most powerful miscroscope! An- 
thropologists shake their head when they are told by evo- 
lutionists that the animal which shows clearest “resemb- 
lance” in a stfuctural way, to certain points in human 
anatomy, is a small fossil ape, about the size of a house 
cat, with a skull one inch in diameter! There remains 
no proof, direct or indirect, of any princtple working the 
changes which are believed to have occurred. All things 
have evolved, if they have evolved at all, by chance. 
Now, over against this doctrine of chance there stands 
the monumental fact that throughout nature, living and 
non-living, there runs a principle of design. The miner- 
als, the plants, the animals, all exhibit, as even the super- 
ficial observer knows or might know, a plan. There is 
