22 
of Species by Mr. Darwin,— but I believe he has not ventured to 
expunge it altogether; and in point of fact I do fairly state he 
case : °he has not, like the ancient evolutionists, professed to evolv 
the whole world of being from an atom or egg. 
36 Well then, my next argument is, that we cannot, as ration, 
beings and natural philosophers, adopt an incongruous hypothe ri 
which would thus place the animate and inanimate world of being 
at issue We must, therefore, reject Darwinism, with reference 
the special subject now under consideration. And besides, I am 
not bound to Jgue here* against it further, in det-l inasmuch as 
Sir John Lubbock does not make the least attempt to 
'^IptoceXtherefore, upon the other hypothesis, that just as 
the inanimate elements were not evolved out of one another but 
always had the distinctive nature and characteristics they now hav , 
ever^ince they had existence, -so the flora and fauna of creation 
have not bee/evolved, but have always had the disti nctive charac- 
teristics they now have. But to save time I. must pass altogether 
from plants to animals,— man being an animal, and as our search 
is for P the closest natural analogies as to the original probable con- 
^“s^Aslegards the inferior animals, therefore, what do we find, 
apart from quixotic speculation ? 
•‘Just as there is no evolution, or ‘ progress,’ or ' future,’ for rooks, or 
metals, for trees or herbs or flowers, there is none for birds, insects fishes, 
or quadrupeds. There are no essential changes m “ 
character. What they ever were, they are, and ever shall be while y 
exist, so far as we have reason to. believe. Insect architecture has not 
progressed or retrograded, like the architecture of man s invention. Each 
kind of bee builds its own peculiar kind of cells ; they never learn or copy 
from one another ; nor do spiders ever copy from or work like bees ^ 
nautilus of to-day has made no discovery in ocean navigation unknownto 
its ancient prototypes. Animal instinct is perfect in its sphere : it cannot 
be improved and it never deteriorates. Such is nature and its law . 
man is not subject to like conditions.” + 
39 “ Not subject to like conditions ! "-then where, it may be 
asked is the analogy? To this I reply, that analogy does not 
mean identity ; and that I by no means wish to P la “ ““ 
inferior animals in all respects upon a level That would be 
quite as unnatural, it seems to me, as to evolve the one ou of the 
other. The proposition I desire to establish from analogy is this— 
* I have done so already in the Institute. Vide Journ. of Trans., 
V °t ^resh Springs 'of Truth: a Vindication of the Essential Principles 
of Christianity , p. 241. (London : Griffin & to.) 
