296 ORGANIC EVOLUTION CONSIDERED 



quired in a court of justice, few cases could ever be 

 decided. 



I will now consider certain objections that have 

 been offered against the theory of design in nature. 

 One very commonly urged is, that design will not 

 account for rudimentary organs. It is asked, for ex- 

 ample, why is it that unborn calves have teeth in the 

 upper jaw which never cut through the gums? I 

 would answer this question by asking and answering 

 this larger question, namely, why is it that the calf is 

 here at all? 



There are hundreds of parts in a calf which are not 

 rudimentary and which are marvelously adjusted to 

 each other in structure and function. In deciding the 

 case as a juror, as to whether or not the calf is an in- 

 dication of design, shall the fact that it has several 

 rudimentary teeth in the upper jaw during the early 

 period of its existence outweigh the hundreds of facts 

 of perfect structure and function and adaptation on 

 the other side? Is it not safe to say that the hun- 

 dreds of facts which indicate design, ought to deter- 

 mine my decision in the face of the one fact in which 

 I may not be able to see any design? If not, then the 

 rules of evidence must be reversed. 



Again, we are told that man has a vermiform 

 appendix, which seems to be useless, and into which 

 hard substances sometimes find their way and pro- 

 duce disease and death. Therefore, Grod did not 

 make the vermiform appendix nor (by implication) 

 did he make any other part of man. And so it hap- 

 pens again, that the thousand well known facts in 

 favor of design are made to weigh less than one fact 

 which might seem to be opposed to it. 



If the thousand facts can be satisfactorily accounted 

 for without assuming design, then the theory sug- 



