96 SIR WILLIAM FLOWER 



first preserved and afterwards discovered to give any indication of 

 the existence of the race. When we contrast the present know- 

 ledge of palaeontology with what it was fifty or even ten years 

 ago, when we see by what accident, as it were — a railway driven 

 through a new country, a quarry worked for commercial purposes, 

 a city newly fortified — all the most important discoveries of 

 extinct animals have been made, we must be convinced that 

 all arguments drawn from the absence of the required links are 

 utterly valueless. The study of palaeontology is as yet in its 

 merest infancy ; the wonder is that it has already furnished so 

 much, not so little, corroboration of the doctrine of transmutation 

 of species. Direct proof is then equally absent from both 

 theories. For the old view it may be said that it has been held 

 for a very long time by persons whose knowledge of the facts of 

 Nature which bear upon it was extremely limited. On the other 

 hand, the new view is continually receiving more support as that 

 knowledge increases, and furnishes a key to the vast numbers of 

 otherwise inexplicable facts in every branch of natural history, in 

 geological and geographical distribution, in the habits of animals, 

 in their development and growth, and especially in their structure. 

 The question of the fixity or the transmutation of species is a 

 purely scientific one, only to be discussed and decided on 

 scientific grounds. To the naturalist it is clearly one of 

 extreme importance, as it gives him for the first time a key to 

 the interpretation of the phenomena with which he has to deal. 

 It may seem to many that a question like this is entirely beside 

 the business of a Church Congress, as it is one with which only 

 those expert in the ways of scientific investigation and deeply 

 imbued with a knowledge of scientific facts could be called upon 

 to deal. This would certainly have been my view if it had not 

 been that some who, from their capacities and education, should 

 have been onlookers in such a controversy, awaiting the issue of 

 the conflict while the lists are being fought out by the trained 

 knights, have rushed into the fray, and by their unskilful inter- 

 position have only confused the issues, casting about dust instead 

 of light. In the hope of clearing away some of this dust the 

 present discussion has been decided upon. It is self evident that 

 a solid advance of any branch of knowledge must in some way 



