146 PROFESSOR EDWARD HULL, LL.D., F.R.S. 
thoughts of his heart and the results of his investigations. 
As Dr. Wallace has shown, the moral and intellectual nature 
of man cannot be accounted for on the theory of descent ; 
and these and the mathematical, musical and artistic faculties 
are the peculiar glories of mankind as distinguished from 
the brute creation.* 
The great structural differences between man and the 
apes hare been fully admitted by all anatomists, and are 
succinctly enumerated by Wallace, St. George Mivart, and 
others. These differences are so great that they have to be 
accounted for, on the Darwinian hypothesis, by throwing the 
origin of man back into the Pliocene, or, perhaps, the Miocene 
period. At the same time, the physical resemblances are no 
less striking and cannot be overlooked in the investigation 
of the problem of his origin. Dr. Wallace, who claims for 
man a spirit altogether transcending the instinct of the lower 
animals, regards the evidence of man’s structural resemblance 
as conclusive of his origin from the Quadrumana. If we go 
with this eminent naturalist so far, and admit a remote but 
common ancestry for man and the ape, are we the less 
beholden to recognise the directing agency of the Creator 
in the evolution of this complex being? In the first place, 
in all our endeavours to explain the ongin of man by 
any process of natural selection, we are still in the dark why 
man should have been the ultimate outcome at all! We are 
in the dark as to the cause why one family of apes in the 
Miocene or Pliocene period should have started in the career 
of advance manwards, while their brethren were left to 
remain apes down to the present day. A change in form and 
structure requires, according to the Darwinian hypothesis, a 
change in the conditions of envir onment; but for all ordinary 
purposes the physical conditions have been persistent through 
‘Tertiary times. The hypothesis implies in the words of Dr. 
Wallace, “that no creature can be improved beyond the 
necessities for the time being;” and if changes occurred in 
the physical or animate world around, necessitating an im- 
provement in the structure of the Miocene apes, these ought 
to have produced modification in the same direction (though 
not perhaps in the same degree) in all the ape-tribe. One 
would like to have some light thrown on the process of 
development from the structure of the four-handed to the 
two-handed animal, where the bind-hands ultimately were 
converted into the foot of man, by which he stands and 
* Darwinism, p. 461. 
