THEORIES UF NATURAL SELECTION AND DESIGN. 51 



There is a failure to grasp the broad general facts evinced throughout the 

 whole of their argument, and one thing which they seem to ignore and set 

 aside is the absolute want of evidence of the evolution of any single species. 

 If we keep this great fact before us, we shall not bow down with absolute 

 submission before the idol of evolution until some more satisfactory proof 

 has been put forward by those who expound that peculiar doctrine. 

 (Applause.) 



Mr. R. J. Hammond. — With reference to the, I think, too brief allusion 

 made in the paper to A.sa Gray, I am of opinion that there must be a 

 great many who from their own observation would be inclined to think 

 with him. (Hear, hear.) They are perhaps, deterred in some measure 

 from saying what they think upon this point, because they are told that 

 it ought not to be looked into, and that it is very doubtful whether any- 

 thing can possibly come of it ; but I cannot help thinking it is a thing that 

 ought to be looked into. 



Rev. J. James, M. A., said : — It appears to me that the writer of the paper, 

 in speaking of " a belief in teleology and a denial of final cause," refers to 

 two things that are inconsistent. Nevertheless, I think the paper one of 

 great value. The author takes it for granted that there is a great deal 

 in evolution ;* and the value of the paper lies to a great extent in the 

 fact, that it sets forth, very plainly and clearly, as all believers in a Creator 

 would maintain, that not only is there, as Darwin himself would say, an 

 origin to the system of evolution, but there is, attributable to the 

 Almighty, in that system, the thought and wisdom contained in the idea 

 of the perpetual presence of the Almighty to guide the development of 

 the things He has designed. I hold that the theory of evolution alone does 

 not stand good on any ground, and that there is more of true science 

 in the suggestion that we have not only to believe in the divine origin 

 of the system of evolution, but also in the periodical and occasional 

 intervention by which it pleases God in His goodness to guide and 

 direct the work of His own creation. The last three lines of the paper 

 are very clear and expressive, namely, " Whereas all such fall into 

 order and significance when traced to active intelligence, both as to 

 origin and guidance." The writer might, as Mr. James has said, have 

 developed his idea much more fully, and have shown that whereas, as 

 Darwin has put it, human thought and skill have succeeded in bringing 

 about variations in the animal world, it is much more to be expected that 

 the thought and power of the Almighty would bring about greater 

 changes from time to time ; while it is only a rational inference that, if 

 in accordance with this view of human intervention the changes attributed 

 to man's action do not take place without his interposition, then, upon the 

 same line of reasoning, all the other changes must have been brought about 

 by the intervention of the Creator. (Hear, hear.) Surely, it is more 

 philosophical to adopt this argument than to attribute all the advances and 



Mr. James probably means " the theory of Evolution." — Ed. 



E 2 



