Ill 
man’s power of intellect and arbitrary interference. This barrier is admitted 
by Darwin himself, and I say it is fatal to the credibility of his hypothesis. 
What are his own words ? “ It is difficult,” he says, “ perhaps impossible, to 
bring forward one case of the hybrid offspring of two animals being perfectly 
fertile. I doubt whether any case can be authenticated.” I ask, is not this 
an admission that there is a natural limitation to the variation of species ? 
If this exist where you have the power and the skill of man’s interference, 
does it not exist where you have no such powerful interference ? For man 
assuredly can do more in a few years than Darwin’s blind law of natural 
selection, unguided by any intelligent power, could do in scores of ages. I 
say, therefore, that this admission is fatal to the credibility of Darwin’s hypo- 
thesis ; that it shows that there is a natural distinction and an impassable 
one between natural species of animals. Some have thought to break through 
this law by adducing supposed cases of fertile hybrids from the vegetable 
kingdom. But these supposed instances have been shown to be ambiguous, 
and by no means determined with any degree of rigid accuracy. But there 
is another law admitted to be a matter of observation, even by Darwin him- 
self— that law is, that the accidental varieties produced in the same species of 
animals and plants by man’s interference have always a tendency to revert 
back to their original type, the moment man’s arbitrary interference is with- 
drawn. We might well indeed question whether man’s artificial varieties 
are improvements of the plant or animal so far as its nature is concerned. 
His prize-ox or pig may be a better manufacture of flesh and muscle, but I 
doubt whether these changes are better or more condusive to the health and 
well-being of the animals themselves. This may be a reason why Nature 
resents these arbitrary interferences, and tends to bring back the creature to 
the more healthy type. The infertility of hybrids, and the tendency of arti- 
ficial variations produced by man in the animate world, both vegetable and 
animal ,, to revert to their original type, are two great facts which prove that 
Darwinism is an incredible and untenable hypothesis. Analogous contra- 
dictory facts, if they could be adduced against the theory of gravitation, 
would be sufficient to render that theory untenable. Analogous contra- 
dictory facts have caused the undulatory theory of light to replace Newton’s 
emission theory. — In the observations I have made, I think I have shown 
that Mr. Warington’s four tests of the credibility of Darwinism all fail. I 
believe that it fails in possibility, for I cannot admit that such organs as the 
eye, the ear, the heart, could be formed without an intelligent designer, or by 
the law of natural selection. I cannot admit the possibility of the formation 
of the sp inning spider’s spineret, with its power of producing thousands of 
parallel strands far better than any cable invented by man, could arise from 
any such law. I cannot admit the possibility of such instincts as those of 
the bee, and other instincts of animals evidencing quite as wonderful an 
amount of intelligent design being produced or propagated by any such 
law. Not only is it impossible to conceive the law of natural variation pro- 
ducing such effects, but further, it is inadequate to account for some of the 
most patent phenomena of animal life. I have shown also that it is incon- 
