317 
faculty of reason . 55 It reminds me of what was written by a great philo- 
sopher of ancient times, “It is the business of specialists to collect all the 
facts ; but it is that of true philosophy to arrive at just conclusions.” Now, 
Darwin, as a specialist, collected an infinite number of facts, but he entirely 
failed to arrive at true, philosophical, and practical conclusions upon those 
facts. Curiously enough, the other day I asked a lawyer — because lawyers 
are very apt to look at facts with the eye of reason, by which facts are tried — 
“ Did you ever read Darwin’s book ? 55 His reply was, “ I read his Origin 
of Species, and when I had gone through it I wondered how a man could 
collect so many interesting facts and fall into so many fallacies.” This 
tends to show that, if we get a clear insight into the character of the 
erroneous deduction that misled Darwin in composing his book, it would 
be easy to refute the conclusions he has expressed on the subject of evolu- 
tion, in the sense in which I may venture to condemn it, namely atheistic 
evolution ; because theistic evolution is a mere speculation as to how the 
Divine Creator proceeded in the work of creation. Any writer may create 
a theory of his own on this subject, because nobody knows anything for 
certain about it ; but this is quite a different proposition. I think, there- 
fore, that the more this subject is examined by the aid of the evidence 
presented to our senses in the light of nature, the less shall we be disposed 
to realise Darwin’s views ; the more surely shall we be brought to the con- 
clusion that creation must have been by species, and that man, who is 
the highest type, was created in all his perfection, as far as that perfection 
has been exhibited ; while , if there be variation, it is rather according to 
the law of species permitting a depreciation under certain circumstances, the 
man, whom we may call the worst made, being only a bad example of what 
the best originally was. I now ask you to give your thanks to the lecturer. 
The vote was accorded amid applause. 
Sir E. Beckett. — I have nothing to add to what I have already said, 
except to acknowledge the vote of thanks you have just accorded to me. I 
am sorry we have had no real discussion to-night ; but, at any rate, I did my 
best to produce one by giving this paper to a very clever friend of mine — 
one of the most scientific men I know, whom I often consult on mathe- 
matical difficulties, and who, I am sorry to say, is not a believer in Revelation. 
He said to me, “ I cannot say that I have a word to utter against your paper, 
except as to two sentences which assume a Revelation : ” which I showed 
him that they do not. I thought this a great concession to be made by a 
man of that kind. 
The meeting was then adjourned. 
VOL. XVII. 
z 
