68 



As to this almost infinite past, I hope to say a word in a minute or two. 

 Later on in the paper we find this quotation from Darwin : — 



" By the theory of natural selection, all living species have been connected 

 with the parent species of each genus by differences not greater than we see 

 between the varieties of the same species in the present day." 



Now, what says Sir Charles Lyell on species ? He says : " Species have a 

 real existence in nature. Each was endowed, at the time of its creation, with 

 the attributes and organisation with which it is now. distinguished." And 

 Darwin, in his book, even admits that the most eminent paleontologists, 

 have unanimously maintained the immutability of species, though Sir Charles 

 Lyell, in his old age, supported the other side. Tyndall (Belfast Address, 

 British Association, 1874) says : — 



" Natural selection acts by the preservation and accumuhition of small 

 inherited modifications, each profitable to the preserved being" ; (and Wal- 

 lace) : " It is a fundamental doctrine of evolution that all changes of form 

 and structure, all increase in the size of an organ, or in its complexity, all 

 greater specialisation, or physiological divisions of labour, can only be brought 

 about inasmuch as it is for the good of the being so modified." 



Then we ought to have a regular and systematically arranged order between 

 every kind of species. But Professor Alleyne-Nicholson, in his Manual of 

 Zoology, says this is not the case, and he adds : — 



" For instance. Vertebrates belong to a higher morphological type than 

 Molluscs, but the higher Molluscs, e.g., the cuttle-fish, are for more highly 

 organised, as far as their type is concerned, than the lowest vertebrate. 

 Therefore, it is obvious that a linear classification is impossible, for the higher 

 members of each sub-kingdom are more highly organised than the lower 

 forms of the next ascending sub-kingdom ; at the same time, they are con- 

 structed upon a lower morphological type." 



Then I should like to read two or three very brief extracts from Mr. Wal- 

 lace's work on Natural Selection, as applied to Man. While upholding 

 natural selection, as an evolutionist naturally would, he somewhat doubts 

 when he comes to Man. He says : — 



" It seems to me to be absolutely certain that natural selection could not 

 have produced man's hairless body by the accumulation of variations from 

 a hairy ancestor. Had it been abolished in ancestral tropical man, it is 

 inconceivable that, as man spread into colder climates, it should not hnve 

 returned under the powerful influences of reversion to such a long-persisteut 

 ancestral type." 



Then again he says : — 



"That the perfectly erect form, short arms, and wholly non-prehensile foot 

 so strongly differentiate man from the arboreal apes, that if continued re- 

 searches in all parts of Europe and Asia fail to bring to light any proof of 

 man's presence, it will be at least a presumption that he came into existence 

 at a much later date, and by a much more rapid process of development. It 

 will be a fair argument that just as he is in his mental and moral nature, his 

 capacities and aspirations, so infinitely raised above the brutes, so his origin 

 is due in part to distinct and higher agencies than such as have effected their 

 development." 



