to fact in this case. Moreover the variations of the individual in its evolution from the cell to the full-grown adult are not accidental, but always on one plan in each species, from which plan there is no departure; and they are never indefinite, and so cannot be taken as instances of Mr. Darwin's accidental and indefinite variations. There is no more change of species in the growth of the unborn babe, than in its future progress from infancy to manhood. And finally, the species, being only an assemblage of common characters, and not an organism, cannot give birth to a species, otherwise than through the individuals composing it. Therefore we must fall back on the facts of the birth of individual animals; and we have seen that no instance has ever been found among them of a change of specific characters. No cow has ever brought forth a foal; no cat has ever had a litter of puppies; no sow has ever produced lambs. We have read of the goose that laid the golden eggs, but we have never read of a goose that laid turkey-eggs. The stubborn facts will not down for any analogies.

We assert that the want of any instance of the change of specific character of any animal, is fatal to the theory of Mr. Darwin.

2. The Multitude of Intermediate Forms between Existing Species, demanded by the Theory, do not now Exist, nor did they ever Exist.

The theory demands that between every two distinct species of animals there should be many thousands of forms each slightly different from the next, since it is only by such insensible variations any species has attained its distinctive character. Evolution is now going forward, as Mr. Darwin abundantly illustrates; and so should be now producing the intermediate forms in preparation for improved species. The result ought to be, that the world would be full of plants and animals belong

ing to no definite species. When a farmer brings his wagon load of slaughtered animals to town, the packer ought to have the greatest difficulty in determining which to cure for pork, and which to pack for beef, and which to smoke for mutton hams. Between every distinctly defined hog and ox there should be ten thousand mongrels. The grain inspector should have infinite difficulty, not in grading his wheat as No. 1, or No. 2, but in deciding whether the grain was wheat, or barley, or corn. Indeed nobody should be able, on going to market, to tell which was fish, and which was flesh, or which was good red herring. But the fact, on the contrary, is, that any housekeeper can tell a herring from a salmon, or a chicken from a pigeon, without any advice from Mr. Darwin.

This fact, then, of the present universal existence of distinct species, and of their distinct classification, is fatal to Mr. Darwin's theory.

Mr. Darwin endeavors to evade the force of this undeniable fact by alleging that the missing links are buried in the geologic strata. He says (Origin of Species, p. 138): "Lastly, looking not at any one time, but to all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties linking closely together all the species of the same group must assuredly have existed; but the very process of natural selection constantly tends, as has been so often remarked, to exterminate the parent forms, and the intermediate links. Consequently, evidence of their former existence could be found only among fossil remains; which are preserved, we shall attempt to show in a future chapter, in an extremely imperfect and intermittent record."

The fact is, he cannot find his missing links down in the rocks, and he abuses them for losing these missing intermediates. Half a dozen times he berates the imperfection of the geologic record. But we shall see presently that it is too perfect by half for his purpose. But in the

meantime, let us note that for every pair of distinct geologic species in our cabinets, we should have about twenty thousand intermediate forms; and that these missing links are conspicuous by their absence.

In confirmation of this statement it will be sufficient to cite a few sentences from the acknowledged leader of European geologists, M. Joachim Barraude (cited by Prof. Winchell in The Doctrine of Evolution, pp. 139, 140): "Eleven family types are known in the primordial fauna. These are as trenchantly differentiated from each other as the same types in any succeeding age, or even in the actual fauna. For example, among crustaceans we have trilobites, phyllopods, and astracods. But between a

trilobite like paradoxus, somewhat lobster-like, and an astracod like primitis, a little bivalve crustacean, the difference of conformation is so marked that, were we to refer them to any common ancestry, we should necessarily conceive of a multitude of intermediate forms which must have existed before paradoxides and the astracods co-existing in the primordial fauna. Such intermediate forms. have left no trace of themselves, either in the rocks which enclose the primordial fauna, or in those which represent the anterior ages. Similar observations apply to the contrasts between any two of the family types of the primordial. It may also be observed that such observations apply to the family types of all the paleozoic ages. forms intermediate between them are universally wanting. One cannot conceive why, in all rocks whatever, and in all countries upon the two continents, all relics of the intermediate types should have vanished.

The

"This disappearance of intermediate types is so general and so constant in the series of geologic ages, and over the entire surface of the explored formations, that it seems impossible to explain it except by regarding it as the effect of a grand law of nature,

"The absence of intermediate forms characterizes the gaps between genera and even species, as well as between orders and families."

This is decisive. Geology knows nothing of the missing intermediate forms. But had they ever existed, she would have preserved them as faithfully as the specific fossils she has kept safely so faithfully and so long. The conclusion is irresistible, that the multitude of intermediate forms, invented by Mr. Darwin, never had any existence save in his own brain. They are only ghosts seen in his mind's eye. But as they are vital to his theory, with their disappearance his theory melts into such stuff as dreams are made of.

3. The Possibility of the Existence of such Multitudes of Mongrels is Prohibited by the Sterility of Hybrids.

The fact is very well known that animals of different species will not breed together. Wild animals of different species manifest a decided repugnance to each other. When under domestication man succeeds in overcoming this repugnance, the offspring are sterile among themselves, though they will breed back to the pure blood. So much modification of any species as can be effected by this, or by any means, can be effected in a short time; and thereafter the variations revert to the normal type.*

So universally admitted is the fact of the sterility of hybrids of different species, that the evolutionists have labored diligently to find some case of such sterility between different varieties produced from the same species by selective breeding. Since, according to the theory, varieties are only incipient species, this should be quite practicable and even common.

But no such case can be found. Prof. Huxley admits the fact, with a full apprehension of its damaging effect on Darwinism: "I do not know that there is a single fact which

* Lyell, Principles of Geology, 8th ed., p. 573 et seq.

would justify any one in saying that any degree of sterility has been observed between breeds absolutely known to have been produced by selective breeding from a common stock. If it could be demonstrated that it is impossible to breed selectively from any stock a form which shall not breed from another produced from the same stock, and if we were shown that this must be the necessary and inevitable result of all experiments, I hold that Mr. Darwin's hypothesis would be utterly shattered."*

I have cited this last sentence for the purpose of exhibiting the utter apostasy of this school of scientists from the first principles of the Baconian inductive science; instead of basing their theory upon known facts, they place it in opposition to all the known facts of the world's history, and demand that we prove its impossibility! Do you call that science?

III. The Geological Record of Life on our Earth in Former Times, Contradicts Darwinism.

We have seen that the present state of the world offers a complete contradiction to the theory. But here, as in the case of spontaneous generation, there is a tendency to imagine that though species may be stable now, having, as it were, set and hardened in the mould, they were more plastic in the early and formative period of the world's young life. It is therefore important to turn to the record of the stone book, and learn what it teaches about the early introduction of life upon the earth. And, happily, the record, though not perfect, is quite full and quite legible. Though some leaves are wanting, the record on those preserved is very plain; and the illustrations are abundant, amounting to many hundreds of thousands, not of wood engravings of the objects, but the actual fossils themselves, some of which are to be seen in any geological cabinet. Let us then ask what the

On the Origin of Species, p. 14.