71 
“ Darwin sees no definite idea — indeed no idea whatever — in the working 
out of the great natural processes.” 
And upon that is founded the whole of the misreasonings and strange 
conceptions of Darwin’s book. The whole of the Darwinian theory presup- 
poses a denial of final causes. My eye was not made to see with, or my ear 
to hear with. In one passage he says we cannot argue, because things appear 
to us in a certain way. But there is a certain principle in my mind, that 
when I survey certain things done by man, they naturally compel me to 
believe that there has been a living person or agent who has done them. If 
I am not able to conclude that, I naturally am not able to make a similar 
inference with regard to the works of the Creator. I know that the eye is a 
wonderful thing to see with, and when I see a telescope made by man, 
the argument is quite good that the one was evidently made with the same 
object as the other. An illustration of this has just struck me. Near 
Rome there is the Alban lake, which, before the Christian era, overflowed the 
land, and a tunnel was cut to let off the water to a lower level without 
damaging the neighbouring lands. When I see the remains of that tunnel, 
though I have not seen the workmen at work upon it, I am bound to infer 
that it was the work of man. Now we have got an Alban lake of a remark- 
able kind in the eye, which distils liquor to wash that organ, and when the 
water comes over the eye there is a tunnel cut through the solid bone to take 
the tears into the nose. When I see these things in the eye and the nose, 
am I not entitled to infer the existence of an intelligent Creator who planned 
with design ? Professor Kirk refers to the chart of the human family, 
drawn up according to the instructions of Agassiz, in Nott and Gliddon’s 
Types of Mankind. I have consulted a later edition of that book than the 
one referred to by Professor Kirk, and not only is the head of the African 
as villanous as you can possibly conceive, but I cannot recognize in the 
European the head of Cuvier. I quite agree that the drawing of the typical 
negro is astonishingly villanous. Possibly there is some confusion in the 
editions : there may be some slight error in the matter. 
Rev. J. Manners. — I think this subject is one of the profoundest interest, 
and I am sure that with a little calm investigation we shall come to some 
satisfactory conclusion upon the subject, because, between the theories of 
Darwin and Agassiz there are really points of great importance which are, to 
a certain extent, reconcilable. I am sure no one will accuse me of finding 
fault with science, for in these days science has made gigantic strides of the 
highest possible use to every rational intellect. Modern researches have 
brought out most beautiful things that were not thought of in Newton’s time. 
Discoveries are following and supplementing each other every day, and now 
we have the spectrum analysis, one of the greatest discoveries of modern 
times. We are greatly indebted to scientific men for having devoted their 
time, talent, and attention to the elucidation of these things. So with elec- 
tricity and magnetism. And while science has been advancing, I do not 
think it has been aware or has taken notice of its own limits. I am sure of 
