520 KANSAS CITY REVIEW OF SCIENCE. 



conspicuous gain an advantage by attracting insects most. That successive gen- 

 erations of flowers should thus show brighter and brighter colors is intelligible. 

 But the beauty of flowers is far more than mere conspicuousness of colors, even 

 though that be the main ingredient. Why should the wonderful grace, and deli- 

 cacy, and harmony of tint be added ? Is all this mere chance ? Is all this super- 

 fluity^ pervading the whole world and perpetually supplying to the highest of liv- 

 ing creatures, and that, too, in a real proportion to his superiority, the most 

 refined and elevating of pleasures, an accident without any purpose at all? If 

 evolution has produced the world such as we see and all its endless beauty, it has 

 bestowed on our own dwelling-place in lavish abundance and in marvelous per- 

 fection that on which men spend their substance without stint, that which they 

 value above all but downright necessities, that which they admire . beyond all 

 except the law of duty itself. We cannot think that this is not designed, nor 

 that the Artist who produced it was blind to what was coming out of his work. 



Once more, the doctrine of evolution restores to the science of nature the 

 unity which we should expect in the creation of God. Paley's argument proved 

 design, but included the possibility of many designers. Not one design, but 

 many separate designs, all no doubt of the same character, but all worked out 

 independently of one another, is the picture that he puts before us. But the 

 doctrine of evolution binds all existing things on earth into one. Every mineral, 

 every plant, every animal has such properties that it benefits other things besides 

 itself, and derives benefit in turn. The insect develops the plant, and the plant 

 the insect ; the brute aids in the evolution of the man, and the man in that of the 

 brute. All things are embraced in one great design, beginning with the very 

 creation. He who uses the doctrine of evolution to prove that no intelligence 

 planned the world, is undertaking the self-contradictory task of showing that a- 

 great machine has no purpose by tracing in detail the marvelous complexity , of 

 its parts, and the still more marvelous precision with which all work together to 

 produce a common result. 



To conclude, the doctrine of evolution leaves the argument for an intelligent 

 Creator and Governor of the world stronger than it was before. There is still as 

 much as ever the proof of an intelligent purpose pervading all creation. The 

 difference is, that the execution of that purpose belongs more to the original act 

 of creation, less to acts of government since. There is more divine foresight, 

 there is less divine interposition j and whatever has been taken from the latter 

 has been added to the former. 



Some scientific students of nature may fancy they can deduce in the working 

 out of the theory results inconsistent with religious belief; and in a future lecture 

 these will have to be examined ; and it is possible that the theory may be so pre- 

 sented as to be inconsistent with the teaching of revelation. But, whatever may 

 be the relation of the doctrine of evolution to revelation, it cannot be said that 

 this doctrine is antagonistic to religion in its essence. The progress of science 

 in this direction will assuredly end in helping men to believe with more assur- 

 ance than ever that the Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth, by under- 

 standing hath he established the heavens. — Popular Science Monthly. 



