(32 
past. Let us take one out of the innumerable instances of adaptation — the 
skeleton of a serpent in the British Museum, with perhaps not less than 300 
joints, admirably fitted to each other, and to the whole ; if these marvellous 
adaptations were to be accounted for by nothing but the principle of natural 
selection and survival of the fittest, it would require an eternity for the 
production of that serpent alone : what then should we say of the adaptations 
in nature which existed in numbers that surpassed all comprehension ? One 
could hardly conceive how it was possible that men of high intelligence 
should have propounded such doctrines. 
Mr. J. E. Howard, F.R.S., while expressing a strong general approval of 
the paper, did not think the description given of evolution was altogether 
correct ; nor did he think that the account Professor Tyndall gave of the 
atomic theory was adapted to anything else but to mislead. The atomic 
theory of the old Greeks had about as much relation to the theories of 
modern science as Tenterden Steeple had to Goodwin Sands (according to 
Kentish traditions) : there might, indeed, have been a connection in some way, 
but it was exceedingly remote and difficult to appreciate. It was equally 
misleading to speak of “ the ” doctrine of evolution, for the doctrine of evolu- 
tion propounded by Tyndall was as different from the doctrine of Lucretius 
as it was possible to be. 
The Rev. J. Sinclair said Dr. McCann had maintained that inherent and 
inherited qualities could not be the same, as they were incompatible ; but as 
a matter of fact there was no incompatibility between the two. A quality 
might be inherited, and yet might be inherent, as being an essential part of 
a man’s nature and constitution. The origin of that quality might be 
hereditary or otherwise ; but if it were an essential part of the being, it was 
inherent. With regard to the evidence, he (Mr. Sinclair) doubted whether 
there was any difference between scientific and any other kind of evidence ; 
or, in other words, whether there was any other than scientific evidence. With 
reference to teleology, he felt that something more than was contained in 
the present paper was necessary to refute the theory of Darwin and Tyndall. 
That theory was a perfectiy consistent one — that the instincts of an animal 
combined with the circumstances were sufficient to produce certain effects, 
or to increase, strengthen, or develop existing faculties of which the germ 
might already exist. There might thus rise up a perfect harmony between 
the faculties of a being and the circumstances in which it existed ; the only 
question was as to the facts : as to hereditary transmission, there could bo 
no doubt that qualities were so transmitted, and often from ancestors more 
remote than the immediate parents. Dr. McCann had referred to navvies 
and others whose work developed the muscular system, and pointed out that 
their children were not more muscular when they were born than were 
the children of other people ; but there might be other causes to account 
for that ; such as insufficient food or bad sanitary conditions, which would 
counteract the effect of the exercise of the muscles in the employment of the 
