22 DARWINISM AND HUMAN LIFE 



lutionist interpretation. There are no locks which 

 its key does not fit. As there is often misunder- 

 standing in regard to the so-called " evidences of 

 evolution," we must note that Darwin's magistral 

 work was not of the nature of an induction leading 

 up to the doctrine of descent as its conclusion. 

 It was a deductive vindication of the doctrine 

 that he gave us — " a cumulative justification 

 showing how well the formula fits a vast series of 

 facts." We cannot agree with the statement 

 that Darwin proved in 1859 what Lamarck had 

 only suggested fifty years before/ for there is no 

 logical proof of the doctrine of descent. It must 

 be allowed, however, that Darwin's illustrations — 

 what some would call his cumulative evidence — 

 were so carefully chosen that they left few openings 

 for efiective criticism. The basis of fact which 

 the formula was shown to fit was solid/ broad, and 

 representative. 



{a) Darwin pointed to the evolution which is 

 going on in domesticated animals, such as sheep 

 and cattle, and in cultivated plants, such as 

 cabbages and apples, and used the argument : If 

 Man has been instrumental in fixing all these 

 varieties in a short time, what may not Nature 

 have effected in a very long time ? This line of 

 argument has been greatly strengthened of recent 

 years by cases like De Vries's mutations of the 

 Evening Primrose {(Enothera lamarcJciana). 



(b) There is significance in the broad fact that 

 it is possible to arrange the animal kingdom in 

 a provisional genealogical tree, showing stages 

 in progressive organisation from lower to higher 



> Lamarck's "Philoaophie Zoologique" was published in 1809, 

 when Darwin was bom 



