202 JOURNAL OF THE PLYMOUTH INSTITUTION. 
and compel those who study them, willingly or unwillingly, to 
withhold assent to it. We have seen also that the investigations 
of embryologists do not necessarily lead to the conclusions drawn 
from them by Dr. Thompson; that they are not inconsistent with 
the older philosophy which recognises in a distinct species a 
separate act of creation. We have noted further that no single case 
of Evolution of one species from another has ever yet come under 
the observation of scientific men. ‘‘The plants pourtrayed on 
the ancient paintings and sculptures of Egypt, the fruits placed in 
coffins with embalmed bodies, and the fruits and seeds found in 
ancient lake-dwellings, all: belong to existing species, with which 
they agree in the most minute and apparently accidental particulars.” 
(Carruthers, Address, p. 19.) | 
And, moreover, if this were not so, there are the two problems 
of the Origin of. Life, and the Origin of Articulate Speech, at 
present apparently unsolvable, whose solution is essential to the 
completeness of the theory. 
Under these circumstances, in spite of the earnest advocacy of 
its disciples, and in spite of addresses so able and so interesting as 
that of Dr. Thompson, we are compelled to conclude that the 
theory of Evolution, if not actually disproved, is certainly ‘‘ not 
proven ;”’ that, ‘“‘in the present state of science,” the evidence - 
against it is stronger than that in its favour. Indeed, it is an open 
question whether it may not have already played its part in the 
dream-world of the philosopher’s brain, and be destined soon to 
fade into some equally attractive, but possibly wholly antagonistic, 
theory ; to be as eagerly supported by enthusiastic admirers as her 
then discarded sister. 
Let it not be said that there is too great readiness on the part of 
those who are unwilling to leave old paths without sufficient 
reason, to accept and endorse what tells against anything new. 
The onus probandi fairly lies on the advocates of what is new, and 
only by the force of proof can they hope to secure the adoption 
of their views. Sometimes, perhaps, vigour of assertion, and a 
determination to compel assent, have been mistaken for this force 
of proof, and have provoked not altogether undeserved reprisals. 
We are told that a man of unusual breadth of view, and freedom 
from prejudice, and the trammels of merely traditional belief (Dr. 
Norman Macleod), after listening to some earnest advocacy of 
Evolution, suggested the following as a history of creation, which 
