164 Darwin, and after Darwin. 
prentice hand on lower types before advancing to the 
formation of higher. Yet. without some such assump- 
tion, it would be impossible to explain, on the theory 
of independent creations, why there should have been 
this gradual advance from the few to the many, from 
the general to the special, from the low to the high. 
I submit, then, that so far as the largest and most 
general principles in the matter of palzontology are 
concerned, we have about as strong and massive a 
body of evidence as we could reasonably expect this 
branch of science to yield ; for it is at once enormous 
in amount and positive in character. Therefore, if 
I do not further enlarge upon the evidence which 
we here have, as it were ez masse, it is only because 
I do not feel that any words could add to its obvious 
significance. It may best be allowed to speak for itself 
in the millions of facts which are condensed in this 
tabular statement of the order of succession of all the 
known forms of animal life, as presented by the 
eminent paleontologist, Professor Copel. 
Or, taking a still more general survey, this tabular 
statement may be still further condensed, and pre- 
sented in a diagrammatic form, as it has been byanother 
eminent American paleontologist, Prof. Le Conte, in 
his excellent little treatise on Evolution and tts 
Relations to Religious Thought. The following is 
his diagrammatic representation, with his remarks 
thereon. 
When each ruling class declined in importance, it did not 
perish, but continued in a subordinate position. Thus, the 
whole organic kingdum became not only higher and higher in 
its highest forms, but also more and more complex in its struc- 
1 For difficulties and objections, see Appendix, 
