30 
were all in one line, or whether there were separate kingdoms for Upper and 
Lower Egypt, and three or four monarclis reigning together ? There are the 
advocates of a short as well as of a long chronology. Then there is the 
question of race : there was within twenty years a belief — a scientific belief — 
held by most eminent naturalists, that mankind did spring from a pair, and 
that all animals did the same. I heard the late Professor E. Forbes, at the Royal 
Institution, declare, very clearly and positively, that there was no evidence 
in the animal kingdom of any one individual belonging to a species being 
found in a position apart from others of the species. He believed in the 
doctrine of specific centres. The test of the theory of evolution is really to 
be found in the evidence of geology. Darwin’s theory of evolution, all must 
admit, is most convenient for classification of specimens, and for arrangement 
of species, by nearest affinities or by their smallest differences ; but because 
organisms are arranged in a settled scheme, it does not follow that there is a 
progressive or unlimited range of development for each part or characteristic 
of a species. The law of change is a question to be decided by observation ; 
both Forbes’ and Darwin’s theories* were supported and deduced solely from 
a consideration of actual observed facts. You may find in the Reptiles four 
main divisions : successive changes of form, in time, occur in every part 
of the skeleton ; sometimes ascending to a more complex form, at other times 
descending : no one can say there is a gradual gain in size, power, intelli- 
gence, or fitness for reptile life in any one of the divisions, or any progression 
or evolution : no one has yet connected these changes with any positive law 
of development ; we can point to numerous changes in forms succeeding 
each other, but links in the chain are wanting. I plead for liberty of opinion 
and for suspension of opinion as to the laws that govern the incoming of new 
species, until all the fossil evidence has been analyzed by the scientific method. 
There is a particular family of Brachiopoda of which 3,000 species are 
recognized by naturalists ; many Brachiopoda are living now, and they 
begin at the earliest times in the Silurian rocks : they are, you know, a 
very numerous family, containing many living species ; but many more 
are preserved in a fossil state. There is no evidence of what may be 
called evolution among them — no species appears to be the development 
of another species. The forms of individuals of the same species of 
this family, taken from the opposite sides of the Atlantic, have been 
compared without finding the smallest difference in localities so distent 
* Hceckel (in 1876 edition of History of Creation , edited by Ray 
Lankester) makes a remark in favour of Centres of Creation, although he is 
a strong evolutionist (page 46, vol. ii.). Thus — “ We may be permitted to 
assume that the original form of every larger or smaller natural group only 
originated once in the course of time, and in only one part of the earth.” I 
observe that a very unscientific term, “ spontaneous generation,” frequently 
occurs in this work. — ( A . Tylor.) 
