256 
300 of them, and know them thoroughly well, and I can confirm all he has 
said. They exist with such minuteness of variation and with such circum- 
stantiality of agreement, that they are really wonderful. But, cui bono the 
argument ? It has no hearing on the question at all. These things can be 
accounted for from the facts of the case — that the eight souls who were saved 
as the originators of the new race went north, south, east, and west, and 
circulated the tradition of those records ; and those records are the traditions 
of the family of eight, and are not to be accounted for in any other way. 
Mr. Keddie. — They certainly could not have been the traditions of the 
drowned inhabitants of the world. (Laughter.) 
The Chairman. — The first part of my argument was that the terms of 
Genesis implied the universality of the destruction of the human race, and 
now I say that they also maintain the universality of the destruction of all 
living things in the same passage. When you interpret the destruction of 
all living things partially, then I say that others have a right to interpret the 
destruction of the human race partially 
Mr. Titcomb. — That is not the point. You say that everybody in all parts 
of the earth had an evidence of the universality of the Flood from local facts 
instead of from tradition. 
The Chairman. — You misunderstand me altogether. Tylor said that in 
his History of Civilization, and I was combating his views. Tylor attempted 
to account for the universality of the tradition, not from the universality of 
the destruction of the human race ; but not admitting that at all, he thought 
the human race got that tradition from the universality of the local evidences 
of the Deluge, showing that all parts of the earth had been under water. I 
combated that by adducing what you have confirmed, that the traditions of 
the human race were so peculiar, and agreed, in the midst of certain diver- 
sities, so thoroughly in the main with what is stated in the Bible, as to prove 
that they all came from one central source. That was my point 
Mr. Titcomb. — But that does not confirm your argument. 
The Chairman. — Yes, in a certain sense it does. I now claim that, having 
shown the universality of the destruction of the human race, Tylors 
argument entirely falls to the ground ; and I now further claim the testimony 
of the rocks as to the universality of the Deluge 
Bev. E. Henslow. — It seems to me that if the rocks prove the universality 
of the Deluge, you confuse the element of time, because the rocks are of 
different epochs. 
The Chairman. — I say that the progress of modern science is going to 
sweep these epochs away. I do not believe in them. Even Professor Huxley 
is beginning to find that the rocks give a very different testimony to what was 
supposed when men held the theory of a succession of creations. One of the 
very last things I heard from Professor Huxley at the Geological Society was 
in opposition to that theory ; and he said that in the lowest rocks, and in the 
Silurian system, you might find as great a variety and as high a development 
as at the present time, for any evidence you have to the contrary. But now 
I want to show how dangerous it is to quote from memory. Stillingfleet 
