said relates to the Negro, pure and simple, excluding the hybrid progeny resulting from the intercourse with the whites; excluding, too, those Africans of other stocks, such as the Ethiopians, who have nearly the same features as the European (excepting color), and who under similar conditions are capable of an approximate degree of advancement. A few of this latter class have occasionally found their way into the United States, and have led to erroneous conclusions in regard to the negro.

Haeckel says: "The Ulotrichi (woolly haired) are incapable of a true inner culture and of a higher mental development even under the favorable conditions of adaptation now offered to them in the United States of North America. No woolly haired nation ever had an important history.' (3-II-309).

The foregoing review in reference to brain capacity leads to the following conclusions:

1. The brain of the primitive man of any given race, was of the full capacity of that exhibited under the most favorable conditions of modern culture in the same race.

2. The modern man is superior to the primitive of the same race neither in organism or mental capacity; and all the evidences of modern civilization, as now exhibited, are but the results of human ingenuity from the beginning each generation improving upon the advances of its predecessor.

3. There is an average size of the human brain,

cannot be developed beyond a certain limit by any amount of mental training. An individual man may by assiduous culture rise above, or by inactivity fall below this average, but beyond this range, like the oscillations of the pendulum, it never rises or falls. An infant now, of the most eminent parentage, knows nothing, and if suffered. to grow up among savages would be an ignorant savage. But train and educate him, he may become the foremost man of his time.

4. A contrary theory involves the conclusion, that there is no limit to brain development-that the skull of the Aryan man of a million years hence would be simply monstrous, and if the corporeal structure enlarges in proportion, the age of Anak would be immeasurably distanced.

5. The fact that there are races of men which manifest an incapacity for improvement beyond a certain limit proves that they are of independent creations. The probabilities are, that the first men appeared upon the land first elevated from the ocean as soon as it became fit for human life; and as there were islands elevated, one after another, successive creations of man must have been accomplished, suited to the environment in each case. As the islands first emerging were only suited to low conditions of life, the most inferior races would be those which were first created, and subsequent races must have appeared in succession of superiority, in other words the lowest in the

CHAPTER IX.

IS THERE AN INTELLIGENT FIRST CAUSE?

General View of the Question-Theories on the Subject Examined— Pain and Suffering not Inconsistent with Design - Evidences of Design in Nature - Universality of Belief in a Personal Deity.

Much fault has been found with Darwin for not having more distinctly referred to the agency of an intelligent First Cause in the creation of new forms. The answer to this on the part of the advocates of his theory is, that the question of the production of organic forms is one of science, to be investigated and discussed by scientific methods, without reference to the existence or nonexistence of God. The answer is certainly pertinent, so far as scientific questions generally are concerned. It is sufficient for the chemist to test the question whether an alkali will neutralize an acid; or for an astronomer to resolve the milky way into stars; or for a naturalist to determine whether a newly discovered animal belongs to one group or another, without going into an inquiry of how all these subjects of study came to exist. And so far as the criticism relates to the interests

religion, I quite agree with the disciples of Dar win, that science must be permitted to pursue its course without let or hindrance.

But the subject of the origin of species belongs to a different category. It involves the distinct question of how species came to exist, or to be created. It puts in issue the very point whether species have been created by a train of natural causes alone, or whether those causes are intermediate only, and have been originated, and kept in continual and harmonious operation by a Creator.

The

We

Any theory of the origin of species without a distinct acknowledgement of a first and final cause, originating, and working by intermediate causes, must lack a foundation on which to rest. subject reaches beyond secondary causes. might as well propose to lift the earth with a lever without a resting place-an effort which Archimedes himself would not have essayed, had his lever extended to the planet Uranus.

It would really seem as if the profoundly scientific men of the day were so intensely learned in natural things, as not to be able to look beyond. God cannot be tested in a crucible, or examined through a microscope, or looked at through a telescope; and therefore he belongs to the "unthinkable and unknowable," he is to be profoundly ignored. But when the question is as to how those things which we see in the sphere of nature came to exist, and we trace back from man

zoöphyte, we get to the end of our tether, and are left to sink down into a hopeless materialism, unless we can find some evidence in physical nature by which the existence of a personal Creator may be fairly inferred.

It is a question of evidence. The Creator is not visible to the external senses-therefore, says the materialist, he does not exist. But a great many things, without being seen by corporeal vision, are proved to be, or to have been in existence, by a process of reasoning on admitted facts. We are permitted to reason from the seen to the unseen. The flame of burning iron gives a peculiar color in the spectrum which never varies-that we see. The same color appears in an analysis of the solar rays, and by this we gain a knowledge of the unseen vapor of iron in the sun.

Has the soul of man ever been seen? Yet who doubts its existence? A plant grows because it has life; yet no one has ever seen its life; nor does anyone doubt it has life. All that we see are the phenomena exhibited by it through its external covering and the same may be said of every living organism.

Who has ever seen a molecule? Yet it is an induction of science that every material substance is made up of minute particles called molecules, no one of which has ever been obvious to the senses. Science itself, therefore, deals with invisable things, and is estopped from disputing a similar method of proving the existence of Deity.