JOURNAL AND PROCEEDINGS. 65 
They antedated the others by a vast lapse of time. The Placenta/s 
are not found until we reach the beginning of the Tertiary. In 
Dana’s ‘‘ Manual of Geology,” revised edition, in the chapter Pro- 
gress of Life, page 592, it is stated the Amphibians show their 
inferiority to the reptiles in the young having gills like fishes; the 
early Zhecodont reptiles’ inferiority to the later in having biconcave 
vertebre like fishes; the Marsupials and Ldentates inferiority to 
other Mammals, etc.” In the previous page—Length of Geological 
Time—occurs this passage: ‘‘ From calculations elsewhere stated by 
the author, it appears that the increase of a coral reef probably is not 
over a sixteenth of an inch a year. Now some reefs are at least 
2,000 feet thick, which at one-sixteenth of an inch a year, corresponds 
to 384,000 years.” Now, for all we know, the Rev. Dr. Grant may 
firmly believe in the six days’ creation recorded in Genesis, and if 
such is the case he may find some little difficulty in accepting such 
a statement. He may reserve the right of rejecting all that may 
be opposed to his personal idea. The approval may be exceedingly 
limited. May not a like objection be urged in the case of the 
great Canadian paleontologist, Sir W. Dawson? 
HYBRIDS, 
Under this head the Doctor states ‘“‘any animal that has been 
born of composite relations will become sterile, and produce no 
more or else return to the normal stock. The evolutionists admit 
that no case has ever been found of their development from one 
species to another.” 
Agassiz declared the Negro and Whites never descended from 
the same pair. This was the opinion also of Professor W. J. McGee 
at the meeting of ‘‘ The American Society for the Advancement of 
Science” at Denver, recently, when the entire assembly, we are told, 
acquiesced in the view (with only two exceptions). 
‘“ Each scientist has a creed of his own, all as much at variance 
with each other as any theological variance,” remarks Dr. Grant. 
Is such the case? I think you will find a noticeable unanimity on 
all the main points of Darwin’s great work as far as leading scientific 
men are concerned (incomplete as it was). Any deficiency has, 
since its publication, been made good by others, more especially by 
the Lowell lectures on “ The Ascent of Man,” by Henry Drummond. 
