68 
she not only assumes this, but derives all sorts of consequences from it. 
These two writers (and I may add Mr. Clodd) are, unfortunately, only 
types of a large class. 
The Right Hon. A. 8. Ayrton.—I am sure we are much indebted to Mr. 
Hassell for the practical illustrations he has given us of what may be 
described as the romantic nature of the doctrines advanced by those who 
profess and teach the theory of evolution. There is, at all times, something 
very fascinating in romance, however strange and startling it may be. 
Many, at the present day, seem to be more fond of reading romances 
than the jrecord of occurrences belonging to the regions of fact and 
truth. This was, in all probability, the idea entertained by the great 
philosopher of old, who said that all young people should be educated 
exclusively in what was true, and that only when they had acquired a perfect 
and solid basis of truth should they allow their minds to wander into the 
arena of fiction. This was because it was only then that they would be able 
to distinguish fiction and romance, poetry and imagination, from what was 
real and true, as made known by the accumulated facts of worldly experi- 
ence. This is a form of education which, I am afraid, is being reversed at 
the present day, when boys are very early entrusted with books of romance 
as part of their reading ; and I think it is found that they always prefer the 
romantic to what is real, and true, and solid. (Hear, hear.) I am of opinion 
that this is the one cause of the popularity obtained by the ideas which 
have been put forward on the subject of evolution. It is so delightful to 
read and speak about plants and animals doing this and that and the other. 
It brings to the mind anew kind of Aisop’s Fables, in which the plants 
and animals are always talking and thinking, and arranging all sorts of 
stories and ideas and actions ; but the evolutionist writers, instead of giving 
their peculiar views the form of fables, dress up the subjects they discourse 
about in the guise of little deities, in the sense of their being able to create, 
by the operation of their own wills, the means of satisfying all the wants of 
their different species, and even of inventing new species, if they find their 
own do not suffice for their requirements. Let us suppose the case 
of an individual belonging to a particular species, who is dissatisfied with 
the conditions of his own existence; for it must be some individual 
member of a species who is first to enjoy the privilege of recruiting 
himself by the process of selection, as I do not see how one individual 
can operate on another. We, at any rate, do not possess this faculty as 
human beings. We cannot say, “ We should like this little boy to have six 
fmgers instead of five,’ then proceed to confer upon him the additional 
digit. Indeed, we are unable to attain such a result for ourselves, however 
much we may desire to bring about such a change. We certainly cannot 
attain it by thinking we should like to have it. Therefore, we have no 
power of evolution in ourselves, and much less can we exercise it in that of 
our neighbours. Let us here consider what we are called upon to believe,— 
because we are asked to give credence to analogous wonders as actual facts. 
We are actually called on to believe that an individual, having effected an 
alteration in the conditions of its own existence, is enabled to impart to its 
