62 THE HAMILTON ASSOCIATION. 
EVOLUTION vs. THE FALL OF MAN. 
Read before the Geological Section of the Hamilton Sczentific Assoctation, 
April 25th, 1902. 
AN ESSAY BY ROLAND D. GRANT, A. M, D. D. REPLY IN CONTINU- 
ATION BY C. C. GRANT. 
The writer during the past session called your attention to a 
meeting of the “‘ American Society for the Advancement of Science,” 
and to an address by Professor McGee of the Smithsonian Institute, 
in which he mentioned that he considered it absurd to believe that 
the Negro, Australian, Caucasian, etc., were all descended from the 
same parents. The entire assemblage, with two exceptions, con- 
- curred in this view, and decided that there never was an Adam or 
Eve. Dr. Grant will probably attribute this decision to the dislike 
of the Negro in the States, and he expresses his belief under the 
head ‘‘ Hybrids.” This sterility of mongrels is the hand-writing of 
God on the law of species. It certainly is a singular fact that the 
offspring of white man and negro, however numerous, die out in the 
second, and seldom reach a third generation. Does it confirm Dr. 
Grant’s view respecting composite relations? The evolutionists, he 
remarks, admit that no case has ever been found of the development 
of one species into another. On this point I most respectfully sub- 
mit an extract of an address to “The Anthropological Society of 
Great Britain” from a leading member, the Rev. F. W. Farrar, M. A. 
“Tt is erroneous to assume that the fertility of hybrids furnishes a 
“decisive proof of the unity of species, and it is premature to assert 
‘that the union of all varieties of the human race produces an 
‘offspring continuously fertile. Fruitful hybrids have been produced 
‘between animals whose common origin cannot for a moment be 
‘assumed. The repulsion between different races occasionally is 
“overcome. Experiment has proved that wolf and hound, dog 
‘and fox, goat and sheep, horse and ass, are severally capable of 
