13 



still more separated, as it has three bones, on the fore limb r 

 which "theory requires that it should have,"(!) "it being impos- 

 sible to obtain evidence more complete in kind than this of the 

 origin of the horse," ergo, I say, I believe that the horse is 

 descended from the anchotherium. Q. E. D. (Huxley.) 



Horses have sometimes been born with extra toes, ergo I 

 believe that the " horse must at one time have had the leg' and 

 foot bones complete, although they were blotted out before the 

 horse was turned into a perfect running machine ! " (Huxley.) 



The Darwin Doctrine therefore being THUS (!) " made out in 

 this one case of the horse," I believe that it is strong evidence 

 that " similar modifications have taken place in all cases." (Huxley.} 

 (Equally strong, no doubt ! No doubt at all about it ! ) 



I believe that the common saying that one " cannot draw blood 

 out of a stone " is the reverse of truth, and that not only bones, 

 sinews, and life can be produced from them, but also mind, reason 

 and the voice of conscience, which though would-be philosophers 

 and atheists brave out in daylight, they are so" horribly afraid" 

 of in the dark. 



I believe that I alone am right, although I see that though 

 slight crosses benefit the offspring, greater crosses, a", e., those of 

 widely separated species, produce sterile hybrids, and I " cannot 

 persuade myself that this parellelism (!) is an accident or an 

 illusion." 



I believe I am right, although I see that the widely different 

 forms of the pigeon among birds, and the cabbage and other 

 varieties among plants, are productive together, while other 

 species " though resembling each other most closely, are utterly 

 sterile when crossed," and I admit that the former is " almost in- 

 variably the case." 



I believe that the "imperfection of the geological record," 

 showing no regular chain of species, and so giving no proof of my 

 theory, and therefore the most obvious and gravest objection that 

 can be urged against it, may nevertheless be assumed by me as 

 conclusively proving it. 



I believe that it is a sufficient answer to the question what has 

 become of the innumerable forms which must have existed before 



