APPENDIX. 153 
the horse to-day has only one, of which the hoof is the 
nail. There you see, say the evolutionists, the horse has 
evolved. Now, we shall not assert that animals have 
never changed their structure or habits. That there has 
been a development in nature, as in scientific breeding, 
of different varieties (not species) is very evident. But 
where is the proof that the four-toed horse, which was no 
larger than a fox, was ancestor to the modern horse? Re- 
mains of these horses have been found in successive 
layers of rock, — but who will assert that the four-toed 
horse no longer existed when two-toed horses lived? 
When the lack of missing links in all other animals is 
pointed out, the reply always is that “the geological 
record is incomplete”; but as to the horse we are to be- 
lieve that the record is complete. Aside from this, how 
is it that the horse, in spite of sixty years of research, 
remains the only animal on which an argument for evo- 
lution can be built up? Wherever you look, in the text- 
books and encyclopedias, there is the horse in its stages 
of evolution, and only the horse. But let us see where 
this evolutionistic reasoning would lead us in the case of 
other animals, known to exist contemporaneously. 
The kangaroo varies in size from that of a sheep to 
that of a small lamb. There is the great gray kangaroo 
(macropus giganteus) and the great red kangaroo, about 
the same size. Then follow other species, in which the 
hind limbs are less disproportioned in length, then the 
small tree-kangaroos, in which the proportions of the 
fore and hind limbs are almost normal. Finally, there 
is the tiny musk-kangaroo, which has a movable first 
toe on the hind foot. Undoubtedly, if these various 
types would exist only in fossil form, their remains would 
be ranged in a chronological order in the museums, 
demonstrating to the eye how the kangaroo gradually 
lengthened its hind legs, the oldest having four legs of 
