66 



this would not contradict the Scripture teaching, that mmi^s life was a 

 special endowment. I will just refer to page 63, near the bottom, where Dr. 

 Porter alludes to man's universal sense of his dependence on God. This is 

 true even of the Australians, a very humble and slenderly-equipped branch 

 of the human family. I may here remind you of the absence of any in- 

 dication whatever of emergence from an ape condition, even among the 

 most backward of mankind. The phenomena show the Australians to have 

 been degraded, not exalted, from their past condition. And their re. 

 ligious ideas exhibit an extraordinary incrustation of splendid primitive 

 truths — reminiscences of some grand and even Scriptural beliefs — with th^ 

 most grotesque and contemptible subsequent additions. The cave paintings 

 of Australia point to a superiority in the past inhabitants of the land. Before 

 I sit down, may I ask whether the marsupium of the Australian animals 

 is not better explained by teleology than by mere natural selection ? A 

 kangaroo's pouch seems a provision for a waterless or droughty country, where 

 a kangaroo mother might have to travel a hundred miles for water. If she 

 left her young at home they would not be alive on her return. The natural 

 perambulator enables her to take them with her in her search for this neces- 

 sary of life. I leave to learned naturalists to say how far the development 

 of this organ has been traced to purely natural combinations, but am old- 

 fashioned enough to see in it myself a special provision for a special need, 

 by One whose tender mercies are over all His works. 



Mr. J. Hassell : What is indicated on the second page of the paper is 

 I think, important, — namely, that evolution is only an hypothesis, not a 

 demonstrated fact. A short time ago, I met a book by a French author, 

 and was much amused by his theory to account for the existence of 

 mammals on the earth at the present time. His line of argument was as 

 follows : — At some period in the far distant past, a number of fishes were lef 

 by the tide in shallow water, and, as the gills would not perform their proper 

 functions, imperfect respiration was carried on by means of the swim- 

 bladder, and this was repeated again and again until ultimately true lungs 

 were developed. Now, let this theory be tested by fact. When fish come 

 to the surface of the water to obtain more oxygen than their native ele- 

 ment contains, it results, not in the development of the swim-bladder, but 

 in inflammation of the gills, and in course of time the fish dies. The 

 writer then goes on to show that, when the fish have developed the 

 swim-bladder into a breathing organ, and so cease to be fish, they 

 became reptiles first, and then by degrees are developed into mammals. 

 It is the duty of those people who believe in Creation to show the fallacy 

 of such theories as these. With regard to a point referred to on page 42 

 I would say that, when these evolutionists ask us to believe that life is the 

 result of molecular motion, or combination, they are really asking us to 

 believe a greater miracle than that which we ask their assent to when 

 we say that God gave life ; because, if life resulted from the non-living, 

 it would be a greater miracle than for God, who is Life, to put life not 

 matter. (Hear.) If we are taunted as being credulous be cause we believe 



