298 [Jan. 5, 
Price.] 
a slow process, and natural selection can do nothing until favorable indi- 
vidual differences or variations occur.’’ Ib. 171. But if all the classes, 
orders and species come from one or two original and simple forms of 
life, there should be everywhere and constantly found intermediate tran- 
sition links, at different stages of progress towards the new species, and 
presenting an inextricable chaos. This result is parried by the argument 
that the process is so slow that it is not seen. The more obvious con- 
clusion would seem to be that this transitional process, or “inextricable 
chaos,’’ are not seen because never happening. And Darwin candidly 
states (Ib. 173), ‘Here, as on other occasions, I lie under a heavy disad- 
vantage, for, out of the many striking cases which I have collected, I can 
give only one or two instances of transitional habits and structures in 
closely allied species of the same genus, and diversified habits, either 
constant or occasional, in the same species. And it seems to me that 
nothing less than a long list of such cases is sufficient to lessen the diffi- 
culty in any particular case like the last.’’ The difficulty was to conceive 
how an insectiverous quadruped could possibly have been converted into 
a flying bat. But it should seem this would occasion small difficulty to a 
theorist who could believe that bats and elephants and man himself, 
sprang from an ascidian, a radiate, or trilobite, or some other early sim- 
ple form of life. He, in such case, becomes too carefully scrupulous for 
his own theory; and he further conscientiously says (p. 198), ‘‘ we have 
seen in this chapter how cautious we should be in concluding that the 
most different habits of life could not graduate into each other; that a 
bat for instance, could not have been formed by natural selection from 
an animal which could only glide through the air.’? Let us observe his 
wise caution, and doing so we must reject his theory. He gives no proofs 
that justify his conclusions. 
Again, Mr. Darwin is constrained to excuse geology for affording his 
theory but little support. Too few fossil specimens have been obtained ; 
too many creatures have perished and left no likeness in the rocks, He 
says, ‘‘although geological research has undoubtedly revealed the former 
existence of many links, bringing numerous forms of life much closer 
together, it does not yield the infinitely many fine gradations between 
past and present species required on the theory ; and this is the most 
obvious of the many objections which may be urged against it.”? Ib, 415. 
But he does not adequately answer this seemingly well founded objec- 
tion. He excuses himself by the paucity of facts. Then it may be asked 
why has the theory been propounded before adequate facts have been 
gathered? Philosophy reserves the privilege of reprimanding her vota- 
ries who built their theories upon insufficient facts; and truth compels 
her to censure unsparingly. They are not permitted to indulge the am- 
bition of theorizing before they have collected adequate materials for 
their edifice. Darwin has ranged widely and observantly the realms of 
nature, and we follow him interestedly ; but he seems at fault in making 
his inductions from the facts he has learned ; has built on an inadequate 
foundation ; has made small things important, and overlooked the full 
