ON CKEATION OR EVOLUTION. 211 



I beg to express my personal thanks to Dr. Kidd for his most 

 valuable j)aper. 



A Rev. VisJTOR. — May I say one word ? I desire that the 

 excellent paper of Dr. Kidd's should not pass without some warm 

 testimony on my part to the remax'kable research, the exhaustive 

 examination and fearless looking into of all the various points of 

 the Evolution theory which it displays. It has given me the 

 greatest possible pleasure ; but I may be pardoned for apparently 

 speaking strongly when I say that we are laid under a great 

 obligation to the writers on the side of the Evolution question. 

 We should never have had such a splendid paper had not we these 

 strange theories put before us. 



I Avill only add that I beg the author kindly to accept this 

 warm, earnest, and heartfelt testimony to the excellent clearness 

 and lucidity of the paper that he has put before us, and I hope it 

 will strengthen faith in the great argument of Design which has 

 never yet really been impaired. 



The discussion was continued by the Rev. .T. Rate in support of 

 the views of the author. 



The Chairman. — I think before calling upon Dr. Kidd to I'epiy, 

 and before conveying to him that cordial vote of thanks which 

 has been already expressed so well, I would urge the very careful 

 reading of this paper upon anyone who wants to understand how 

 the matter really stands. It does so clearly trace the cu.rious 

 change which has come over the theory of Evolution. It shows 

 how many theories there are, and how the old theory of chance 

 variations of species has to get over Weissmann's theory — in fact, 

 much has changed to alter the theory of Dai-win as it used to be. 

 Then we go to inorganic evolution as compared with original 

 development, and that has got down to development by law and 

 not by caprice. If development by law is not a sign of design 

 I do not know what is. One can use the phrase evolution to 

 expi'ess what we see around us. " The work of the Creator " is a 

 useful expression. We talk of the electric current, for instance, 

 but one does not commit one's self to the current — a man talks 

 about a hexagon, and makes the sign on the blackboard, and 

 if he believes that is how atoms are builb up he must have 

 great belief. Some accept it in that way without committing 

 themselves to any authentic theory, as I believe this is ; but 

 when it is used contrary to the doctrine of design, we cannot 



p 2 



