330 THE STOEY OP THE E^RTH AND MAN. 



have existed ever since man began to reason on nature, 

 and this last of them is one of the weakest and most 

 pernicious of the whole. Let the reader take up 

 either of Darwin's great books, or Spencer's "Bio- 

 logy," and merely ask himself as he reads each para- 

 graph, "What is assumed here and what is provedj" 

 and he will find the whole fabric melt away like a 

 vision. He will find, however, one difference between 

 these writers. Darwin always states facts carefully 

 and accurately, arid when he comes to a difficulty 

 tries to meet it fairly. Spencer often exaggerates or 

 extenuates with reference^oTirfs facts, and uses the 

 arts of the dialectician where argument fails. 



Many naturalists who should know better are puz- 

 zled with the great array of facts presented by 

 evolutionists ; and while their better judgment causes 

 them to doubt as to the possibility of the structures 

 which they study being produced by such blind and 

 material processes, are forced to admit that there 

 must surely be something in a theory so confidently 

 asserted, supported by so great names, and by such 

 an imposing array of relations which it can explain. 

 They would be relieved from their weak concessions 

 were they to study carefully a few of the instances 

 adduced, and to consider how easy it is by a little 

 ingenuity to group undoubted facts around a false 

 theory. I could wish to present here illustrations of 

 this, which abound in every part of the works I have 

 referred to, but space will not permit. One or two 

 must suffice. The first may be taken from one of 



