‘ CREATION BY LAW. 295 
existed in a solid state 500,000,000 of years, and 
that therefore time would not suffice for the slow pro- 
cess of development of all living organisms— it is 
hardly necessary to reply, as it cannot be seriously 
contended, even if this calculation has claims to ap- 
proximate accuracy, that the process of change and 
development may not have been sufficiently rapid to 
have occurred: within that period. His objection to 
the Classification argument is, however, more plau- 
sible. The uncertainty of opinion among Naturalists 
as to which are species and which varieties, is one of 
Mr. Darwin’s very strong arguments that these two 
names cannot belong to things quite distinct in nature 
and origin. The Reviewer says that this argument is of 
no weight, because the works of man present exactly 
the same phenomena; and he instances patent inven- 
tions, and the excessive difficulty of determining whether 
they are new or old. I accept the analogy though it 
is a very imperfect one, and maintain that such as it 
is, it is all in favour of Mr. Darwin’s views. For 
are not all inventions of the same kind directly affili- 
ated to a common ancestor? Are not improved Steam 
Engines or Clocks the lineal descendants of some ex- 
isting Steam Engine or Clock? Is there ever a new 
Creation in Art or Science any more than in Nature? 
Did ever patentee absolutely originate any complete 
and entire invention, no portion of which was derived 
from anything that had been made or described be- 
fore? It is therefore clear that the difficulty of dis- 
tinguishing the various classes of inventions which 
