Claypole on (Dcirwin and Geology. i6i 
and elaborate review of the whole subject he sums \.\\y in the 
following- words (p. 6i i ), 
From the above consideration it appears that species have a real exis- 
tence in nature, and that each Avas endowed at the time of its creation 
■with the attributes and organization witli which it is now distinguislied. 
In other words he rejects the doctrine of the transmutation 
of species, in favor of that of special creation, and in order to meet 
the objection that no such event had ever been reported, he 
later (p. 705) enters on an elaborate calculation of the chance 
of such an event having been seen by man. "If one species 
only of the animal kingdom died out in forty years in a region 
of the dimensions of Europe, no more than one mammifer 
might disappear in .|o,ooo years. 
The extreme caution that was the strongest feature in the 
character of Lyell is nowhere more distinctly shown than here. 
Could he ha\'e extended his principle of uniformity over the 
whole realm of creation, organic as well as inorganic, it would 
have given a completeness to his work which it lacked when 
in 1830-53 he published the earlier editions of the "Principles." 
But after a careful examination of Lamarck's theory of the trans- 
mutation of species, it was rejected as baseless, and, no other being 
then in. sight, the conscientious geologist preferred letting his 
book go forth without what would have been to many minds 
its strongest attraction. He was deficient in anticipation — that 
prophetic insight of science — which enables those who pos- 
sess it to look ahead over dificulties and see them all clearing 
away before the principle, in the truth of which they firmly be- 
lieve. This is one of the sublime faculties of the human mind- 
it develops a faith that overcomes every difiicult}-, silences every 
objection, holds its own in spite of neglect, opposition and ridi- 
cule, and at length enjoys its reward in full fruition. Such faith 
was not Lyell's, but it was Darwin's, and he lived to sec it end 
in the realization of his predictions." 
' We have a parallel case at the present day. A certain school of 
evolutionists adopt the views of Darwin in every point but one. They 
admit the development by variation and selection, of all animals ex- 
cept man. For various reasons they hesitate to acknowledge their 
own descent from a lower form. In a similar condition are those 
who insist on the introduction of the "Deus ex machina" at the be- 
ginning of life. Their faith is not the faith of Darwin. 
