EVOLUTION AND DESIGN. 113 



regarded. And also the same author, who you remember was the 

 co-originator of the evolution theory, has given strong proof against 

 the theory itself when he alluded to three grand stages in the 

 progress of creation, which could not be accounted for by the 

 evolution theory at all, and " must have proceeded from the action 

 of the spiritual world " (that is the expression of Professor Wallace). 

 What he m.eans by " the spiritual world " I do not profess to say, 

 further than that we must be cautious in fixing our own opinion 

 on it, for he may not mean by that expression exactly what we 

 mean. But he does show you there are three grand stages to which 

 the evolution theory does not apply, and that a direct interference 

 from the spiritual world, as he calls it, or, as I should call it, from 

 the Supreme Spirit, has brought about the rise of the organic from 

 the inorganic, the establishment of mind in the animal, and, sub- 

 sequently, of spirit in man. 



I cannot expect < o take up the time of the meeting unreasonably ; 

 but I do bring before you one point which should never be 

 slurred over, and that is the question of man being a spirit. If 

 the evolution theory be true then every created thing in this world, 

 be it plant, or animal, or man, in all its parts and in all its charac- 

 teristics must have arisen from the same cause. 



How can we believe, if that evolution theory be true, that there 

 is an imnioi'tal spirit ? It is impossible, unless you contend that 

 the spirit exists right back through all animal life. You must 

 either do that or come to some period when spirit was introduced 

 into the world. Then, if it could not have been evolved in such a 

 way, and yet the doctrine of evolution is true, there is but one final 

 result to come to, that man is like the brutes that perish. The more 

 I read books on evolution, the more 1 am convinced that the whole 

 theory is utterly unsound, and has no foundation whatever. 



The Chairman. — Before asking the author to reply may I sum 

 up the result of my own reading of the theory of evolution, and 

 that is to advise everyone, when they speak and read of evolution, 

 not to attribute to Darwin what he did not say, and to be sure of 

 what is meant by the word. I do not know one word among the 

 many words that have a dubious meaning, which is used in more 

 widely different senses than evolution. (Cheers.) 



The Author. — I have a few words to say in furtherance of 

 what the Chairman has said, and in reference to what Mr. Thrupp 

 said just now. If by evolution was meant self-evolution, as I 



