464 
The Progress of the 
[October, 
of unimpeachable orthodoxy now admit that there are no 
theological grounds for a denial either of the antiquity of 
man or of the doctrine of Evolution, and that the Church 
may watch the contest between the Old and the New Schools 
of Biology as calmly as she did that between the Phlogistian 
and the Lavoisierian Schools of Chemistry. But Mr. Wal- 
lace puts in a word of caution which cannot be deemed 
useless. He reminds us that the hypothesis now dominant 
in scientific circles, that man has been gradually developed 
from some lower animal form, and that he has existed upon 
the earth from the Miocene epoch, possibly even from the 
Eocene, is not unbeset with difficulties. In the interests of 
Science these should receive full and fair consideration, and 
not be ignored, as were till recently the faCts incompatible 
with the chronology of Usher. It is recognised as a curious 
circumstance that, notwithstanding the care with which 
pre-historical human remains have been sought for in all 
civilised countries, — notwithstanding the incidental facilities 
for research afforded by railway excavations, mines, and 
other engineering operations, — little if any light has recently 
been thrown upon the time or the mode of man’s origin. 
“ Amid the countless relics of a former world that have 
been brought to light, no evidence of any one of the links 
that must have connected man with the lower animals has 
yet appeared.” Professor Mivart, in his well-known work 
“ Man and Apes,” has shown, by a most careful structural 
analysis, that man is related not exclusively and specially 
to any one of the anthropoid apes now existing, but almost 
equally to the orang, the chimpanzee, the gorilla, and the 
gibbon. Hence, on the evolutionist hypothesis, he is 
descended not from any one of these, but from an extinCt 
and as yet unknown form which must have branched off at 
an exceedingly early date from the common stock. “ As 
far back as the Miocene deposits of Europe we find the 
remains of apes allied to these various forms, so that in all 
probability the special line of variation which led up to man 
branched off at a still earlier period. And these early forms, 
being the initiation of a far higher type, and having to 
develope by natural selection into so specialised and alto- 
gether distinCt a creature as man, must have risen at a very 
early period into the position of a dominant race, and spread 
in dense waves of population over all suitable portions of 
the great continent — for this, on Mr. Darwin’s hypothesis, 
is essential to developmental progress through the agency 
of natural selection.” 
Such being the case, it is asked why we find no relics of 
