io8 COMPARATIVE ANATOMY vin 



uninfluenced by our knowledge of the fact that each individual 

 man comes into the world by the ordinary processes of 

 generation, according to the same laws which apply to the 

 development of all organic beings whatever, that every part of 

 him which can come under the scrutiny of the anatomist or 

 naturalist has been evolved according to these regular laws 

 from a simple minute ovum, indistinguishable to our senses 

 from that of any of the inferior animals. If this be so if 

 man is what he is, notwithstanding the corporeal mode of 

 origin of the individual man, so he will assuredly be neither 

 less nor more than man, whatever may be shown regarding 

 the corporeal origin of the whole race, whether this 

 was from the dust of the earth, or by the modification of 

 some pre-existing animal form. This, I conceive, is the 

 ground on which those who would maintain unimpaired 

 the spiritual and moral dignity of the human race may safely 

 stand. 1 



In 1861 one of the most distinguished of American 

 naturalists wrote : " Those, if any there be, who regard the 

 derivative hypothesis as satisfactorily proved must have loose 

 notions as to what proof is. Those who imagine it can be 

 easily refuted and cast aside must, we think, have imperfect 

 or very prejudiced conceptions of the facts concerned and of 

 the questions at issue." The experience of nine years leaves 

 the case precisely, in my judgment, as thus stated by Professor 

 Asa Gray. Anything which assists to throw light upon it, 

 to lead us nearer either to its acceptance or rejection, is of 

 primary importance to the biologist. We must not refuse to 

 take it into earnest consideration. 



I think, therefore, that it may be worth while to devote a 

 few words to two objections which are frequently urged, not 

 indeed against this theory, but against the prominent place I 

 would assign to its consideration by all who would enter 

 deeply into the philosophy of biology. Both of these objec- 

 tions are founded upon misconceptions as to the real nature 

 of the present aspect of the theory of development. 



1 For the bearings of the Evolution theory of Creation on this subject, see 

 Baden Powell, op. cit. 



