LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, 
 
 %$ — ®mm¥ fa- 
 Shelf. 
 
 ^iiA^ 
 
 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 
 
 - 
 
\ ■ 
 
 '4 
 
 I I 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
\ 
 
 - 
 

KVOLUTION 
 
 VERSUS 
 
 INVOLUTION 
 
 A popular exposition of the doctrine of true 
 
 EVOLUTION, A REFUTATION OF THE THEORIES 
 OF HERBERT SPENCER, AND A VIN- 
 DICATION OF THEISM. 
 
 "****# let no man out ol a weak conceit of sobriety, or an ill-applied moderation, 
 think or maintain that a man can search too far or be too well-studied in the book of God's 
 word, or in the book of God's works, divinity, or philosophy ; but rather let men endeavor an 
 endless progress or proficience in both." — Bacon's Advancement of. Learning. 
 
 
 1 C4 "\ 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 
 ZABRISKIE. 
 
 1885. 
 
 
 

 Agnosticism must be met on its own Ground, 'and 
 defeated with its own Weapons. 
 
 COPYRIGHT SECURED. 
 
" 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 Page 12, line.36, for untramelled, read untrammelled. 
 Page 15, line 15, for Emanuel, read Immanuel. 
 Pages 10, 252, 255, foot-notes, for Meikle John, read Meiklejohn. 
 Page 17, foot-note, line 2, for convre, read eouvre. 
 Page 17, foot-note, line 7, for ancune, read aucuue. 
 Page 17, foot-note, line 7, for re elle, read reelle. 
 Page 17, foot-note', line 10, for Vantre, read Tautre. 
 Page 33, line 25, for render, read renders. k 
 
 Page 37, line 23, for rythm, remhrhythm. 
 Page 60, line 11, for rythmic, read rhythmic. 
 Page 38. line 9, for diagram •atiadhj, read diagrammatically. 
 Page 108, line 36, for the nature of which, read of the nature of which. 
 Page 127, line 22, for Diatomaciae, read Diatomaceae. 
 Page 145, line 1, for serve, read ser res. 
 
 Page 164, line 16, and table of civilization, for Des Cartes, read Descartes. 
 Page 165, line 31, for succed, read succeed. 
 Page 166, line 17, for independence, read interdependence. 
 Page 171, line 18, for of Rome, read atf Rome. 
 Page 172, line 28, for has, read Aave. 
 Page 186, line 21, for are, read is. 
 Page 189, line 33, for were, read where. 
 Page 104, foot-note, for Nmevah, read Nineveh. 
 Page 198, line 27, for Babalonian. read Babylonian. 
 Page 236, line 4, for becomes, read become. 
 Page 257, line 12. tor form, read forms. 
 
 Page 249, lines 10 and 14, for Alt ri man, read Ormuzd, and for Ormuzd, read 
 Ahriman. 
 
 Page 249, line 13, for Ormuzd, read Ahriman. 
 
To 
 
 My Dearly Beloved Wife, 
 
 whose Sympathy and Encouragement 
 
 Enabled the Author to lay these 
 
 Pages before the Public. 
 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 A popular exposition of the doctrine of Evolution from the 
 stand-point of Theism has been a long-felt want. Scientifically 
 considered, Evolution is no longer a mere hypothesis, but has as- 
 sumed its place among the recognized truths which the intellect of 
 man has wrung from the arcana of nature. The rounded outlines 
 of the doctrine of Evolution rise up before us in all their fullness 
 and beauty, challenging alike our admiration and veneration. It 
 may be likened to a majestic temple, whose broad foundations are 
 laid upon the everlasting rocks of truth, and whose mighty dome 
 embraces the Universe. Through man's patieut toil and industry, 
 nature has yielded up the treasures with which this wondrously 
 beautiful edifice has been erected. One by one the stones have 
 been placed, until the swelling proportions of column and dome 
 warn us that the hour of dedication is at hand. Let all who will 
 enter in and worship. Generations have perished in the great un- 
 dertaking since the corner-stone was laid, but the upward course 
 of the structure has not been stayed, and the work of every gene- 
 ration has enabled its successor to build higher and truer. Many 
 of those who have been the foremost builders in erecting this grand 
 structure have failed to realize the significance of their own handi- 
 work. " They builded better than they knew." 
 
 The chief object of the following pages is to do somewhat to- 
 ward stemming the torrent of Sceptical or Agnostic belief which 
 is sweeping away old land -marks and essaying to undermine the 
 very foundations upon which religion and morality are based. 
 Whilst the ultimate triumph of these principles can never be 
 doubted, yet it becomes the duty of every one whose convictions 
 are deep and earnest so to act as if these principles were in jeopardy, 
 and to do all in his power to turn back the destroying tide. 
 
 By no feature is the nineteenth century more clearly marked off 
 from all the centuries that have preceded than by the wide diffu- 
 sion of knowledge among the masses ; and this, which is true of 
 European countries, is still more conspicuously the case with the 
 
vi Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 United States. Subjects which an hundred years ago were only- 
 handled in the lecture-room of science have now become public 
 property, and are discussed by every age,' sex, and condition. 
 Books have been multiplied to an incredible extent, and rendered 
 accessible to even the poorest among us. Public libraries are 
 opened on every hand, and learning is scattered broadcast. 
 
 Fifty years ago the teachings of the great Frenchman, Lamarck, 
 found but few hearers, but ignorant indeed must be the man at the 
 present day who has.not heard of the so-called^ Darwinian theory. 
 The sum total of Darwinism in the minds of many who pass for 
 men of more than average intelligence is that there is no God r 
 and that we are descended from the monkey. 
 
 The violent opposition which the doctrine of Evolution has met 
 with in the last two decades from the best and noblest minds of 
 the day is the result of the false interpretations to which it has 
 been subjected. 
 
 In the hands of its principal expounders, the doctrine has ar- 
 rayed itself unblushingly against the highest and most sacred 
 truths known to man ; thus was inaugurated that conflict between 
 religion and science, so-called, which still rages. The so-called 
 Evolutionists, putting their own interpretations upon the truths of 
 nature, affirmed that there was no alternative : that religious teachers 
 must either give up their Religion or reject the positive revelations 
 of Science. Called upon to weigh the Higher by the Loiver, could 
 there be a doubt as to the decision of a truly high-souled man well 
 grounded in the teachings of religion and the axioms of morality ? 
 Evolution was unhesitatingly branded as false; they preferred the 
 light of the noon-day sun to the flickering of a taper ! So long 
 as the doctrine of Evolution received the one-sided interpretation 
 placed upon it by the antagonists of revealed religion, so long did 
 religious teachers preach a crusade against that which threatened 
 the best interests of Humanity. But these false interpreters of 
 scientific truth are rapidly giving place to a set of men who, equally- 
 armed with the weapons of science, see in the theory of Evolution 
 nothing which is in conflict with the truths of revealed religion. 
 
 The writer of this work, in the course of his studies, became 
 more and more convinced that the conclusions arrived at by Mr. 
 Spencer and others were essentially false — that their system, in a 
 word, was not one of Evolution at all, but a theory of Involution. 
 
Preface. vii 
 
 On reading Mr. Spencer's " First Principles," I learned that he 
 himself recognized this, and acknowledged it in so many words. 
 (See First Principles, 2d edition, p. 286.) 
 
 This is not the place to enter upon a criticism of the obvious 
 inconsistency of calling that a process of Evolution which leads 
 to Involution. I at once discovered that Mr. Spencer had inverted 
 the telescope and was viewing the Universe through the large 
 end. I found out later that I was not alone in my understanding 
 of Mr. Spencer's system, and that others had arrived at the same 
 conclusions. Thus, Mr. Marti neau, in his criticism, showed the 
 unfitness of the word Evolution to express Mr. Spencer's theories, 
 and gave its true meaning in these words: "It means to unfold 
 from within ; and it is taken from the history of the seed or em-- 
 bryo of living natures. And what is the seed but a casket of pre- 
 arranged futurities, with its whole contents prospective, settled to 
 be what they are by reference to ends still in the distance?" 
 Mr. Spencer replied to this criticism as follows : 
 ''Now, this criticism would have been very much to the point 
 did the word Evolution truly express the process it names. If 
 this process, as scientifically defined, really involved that concep- 
 tion which the word Evolution was originally designed to convey, 
 the implications would be those Mr. Martineau alleges. But, un- 
 fortunately for him, the word, having been in possession of the 
 field before the process was understood, has been adopted merely 
 because displacing it by another word seemed impracticable. And 
 this adoption of it has been joined with a caution against misun- 
 derstandings arising from its unfitness. Here is a part of the cau- 
 tion : ' Evolution has other meanings, some of which are incon- 
 gruous with, and some even directly opposed to, the meaning here 
 given it. * * * The antithetical word Involution would 
 much more truly express the nature of the process, and would, 
 indeed, describe better the secondary characters of the process 
 which we shall have to deal with presently.' So that the mean- 
 ings which the word involves, and which Mr. Martineau regards 
 as fatal to the hypothesis, are already repudiated as not belonging 
 to the hypothesis." 
 
 In this confession, Mr. Spencer sounded the death-knell of his 
 own system. Whilst I could not accept the "Evolution" of Mr. 
 Spencer, I could readily accept the Evolution which, in ultimate 
 
viii Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 definition, means a progressive unfolding of a Supreme Divine 
 Will.- I soon became satisfied that the doctrine of True Evolu- 
 tion, instead of being antagonistic to the existence of a Being 
 distinct from the Universe, carried with it demonstrative proof of 
 His existence — that it furnished one of the strongest weapons 
 wherewith to combat and overthrow the false teaching which had 
 usurped the name of Evolution. This point reached, I argued 
 that, independent of the scientific evidence in' its favor, it became 
 mj bounden duty to accept that which would place Theism on 
 such an impregnable basis. 
 
 The ancient stronghold of the vulgar Atheist was based on the 
 ground that "the world has always been essentially as it is now." 
 This bare assertion could not be scientifically refuted until the 
 truths of Geology and Paleontology demonstrated that this view 
 of things was false — that there was a time when no life existed on 
 the globe, and that there has been a gradual development of an- 
 imal and vegetable life from the beginning. The theory of Evo- 
 lution expounded in the following pages, which we may designate 
 by the title True Evolution to distinguish it from the False Evo- 
 lution or Involution of Spencer, teaches that the Universe is the 
 expression of the Supreme Will, which has been unfolded by a 
 continuous and gradual process. In other words, it teaches that the 
 Universe has been created through the agency of secondary laws. 
 
 I need hardly say that the significance of the scientific evidence 
 for Evolution has been augmented an hundredfold since it con- 
 firms the promptings of the moral sense, and places the eternal 
 truth of Theism upon such unassailable ground. TSTo true Theist 
 should cast from him this only weapon which physical science 
 can furnish to overthrow the errors of Atheism, whether it calls 
 itself Pantheism, Agnosticism, or Monisticism. 
 
 Let religious teachers see to it that they do not treat with con- 
 temptfthe writing inscribed on the rocks by the hand of Omnipo- 
 tence, for it is a revelation as certainly as those Ten Command- 
 ments which constitute the Mosaic Law. ) 
 
 In attempting to treat within so small a compass this vast sub- 
 ject, I have aimed only to bring forward the salient truths upon 
 which the doctrine rests, and have endeavored to eliminate every- 
 thing which did not contribute conspicuously to that end. As the 
 book is intended for that portion of the reading public whose sci- 
 
Preface. ix 
 
 entitle attainments are very general, I considered that it was more 
 important to keep before the mind the great issues rather than to 
 perplex it by diffuseness of detail. 
 
 In the arrangement of the work, I have been guided solely by 
 the desire to present the facts in their appropriate relations, thus 
 bringing before the mind a rounded outline of the whole. The 
 first chapter is devoted to a brief historical sketch, in which the 
 reader will see that the history of the doctrine is an illustration of 
 the doctrine itself. The second chapter defines what we are to 
 understand by Evolution, and enters upon the criticism of Mr. 
 Spencer's System. The fallacies of Agnosticism are touched upon, 
 and the chapter concludes with a parallel drawn between the theory 
 of Special Creation and Creation by Evolution, showing the vast 
 superiority of the latter in fulfilling our religious and moral needs. 
 
 In the next seven chapters, the subject of Cosmogenesis, or 
 Evolution of the Universe, is discussed under the following head- 
 ings : 
 
 Astrogencsis, or the Evolution of Worlds. 
 Biogenesis, or the Evolution of Life. 
 Phylogenesis, or the Evolution of the various Species, Genera, 
 
 &c, both animal and vegetable. 
 Ontogenesis, or the Evolution of Individual Forms, as the chicken 
 
 from the egg, the plant from the seed, &c. 
 Psychogenesis, or the Evolution of the Soul. 
 Sociogenesis, Or the Evolution of Society. 
 
 This order has not been followed throughout, as it was deemed 
 expedient to marshal the evidence upon which organic Evolution is 
 based before entering upon the discussion of the origin of Life on 
 the Globe, and the possible lines of development which it pursued 
 in its upward growth. The subject of Ontogenesis is therefore 
 treated next after Astrogenesis, and all the chief arguments for 
 organic evolution are embraced in the same and succeeding chapter. 
 
 Criticisms upon Mr. Spencer's theories are scattered through the 
 work, but are chiefly centered in the second, tenth, and eleventh 
 chapters, and their total inadequacy to fulfill the higher needs of 
 man is, I hope, clearly demonstrated. 
 
 The Author disclaims all intent to reflect upon Mr. Spencer 
 personally ; his system is alone in question. If, therefore, in the 
 warmth of conviction, emphasis is placed upon his errors, it is not 
 
x Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 to be looked upon as directed against the man, but against the 
 teachings which he has laid before the world. 
 
 In my desire to insure a clear understanding of the subject, I 
 have, on important points, rather courted repetition than avoided it. 
 
 The introduction of a number of new terms will, I hope, con- 
 tribute to a better understanding of the subject. 
 
 The Author is deeply conscious of the many shortcomings of 
 the work, but if its perusal will set at rest conflicting doubts as to 
 the existence of a Supreme Beneficent Creator, the object for 
 which it was written will have been fulfilled. 
 
 June 19th, 188J,. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Chapter I. Historical Sketch, 1 
 
 Chapter II. General Considerations — Evolution Defin- 
 ed — Spencer's System shown to be a 
 Theory of Involution — Criticism of his 
 Theories — Agnosticism — Conceptions of 
 the Uncaused Being — Creation by Evo- 
 lution and Instantaneous Creation Com- 
 pared, 24 
 
 Chapter III. Astrogenesis, or the Evolution of Worlds, 60 
 Chapter IV. Arguments for the Doctrine of Evolution 
 
 drawn from the Field of Living Nature, 68 
 Section 1. Evidence from Ontogenesis, or the 
 Evolution of the Individual 
 Form : the Animal from the 
 Egg, the Plant from the Seed ; 
 the Metamorphoses of Certain 
 Animals — Significance of Eu- 
 
 dimentarv Organs 68 
 
 Section 2. Evidence from Natural Selection 
 and the resulting Mutation of 
 
 Species, 77 
 
 Chapter V. Arguments for Evolution drawn from Pale- 
 
 ontolog} 7 , 90 
 
 Chapter VI. Biogenesis, or the Evolution of the Princi- 
 ple of Life, 106 
 
 Chapter VII. Phylogenesis, or the Evolution of the various 
 
 Paces of Animals and Plants, 118 
 
 Chapter VIII. Psychogenesis, or the Evolution of the Soul 143 
 
xii Contents. 
 
 PAGE. 
 
 Chapter IX. Sociogenesis, or the Evolution of Society, . 162 
 Section 1. Brief Be view of Society, ... 162 
 Section 2. Society as an Organism, .... 176 
 Section 3. Development of Language and 
 
 the Social Functions, . . . 182 
 Section 4. Development of Governmental 
 
 Institutions, . . 187 
 
 Section 5. Development of Eeligious and 
 Moral Institutions — The Neces- 
 sity for a Revelation. shown, . 210 
 Section 6. Resume* of the .Four Stages of 
 
 Social Development, .... 227 
 Chapter X. Design in the Universe — Personality of the 
 
 Deity, 230 
 
 Chapter XI. Good and Evil, 1. 246 
 
 Chapter XII. Atheism, 253 
 
Chapter I. 
 
 Historical Sketch. 
 " History repeats itself." 
 
 The ideas underlying the theory of evolution are older than the 
 mythology of the ancient Greeks. The human mind, even at that 
 early period, groping in the darkness after the mystery of exist- 
 ence, embodied in the fable of the Elder Cupid the genesis of the 
 Universe. He was the oldest of all the gods, and without a pro- 
 genitor, except only that he came from the Egg of Nox, (night,) 
 and from him all things sprang. I need hardly say that this Cupid 
 is not to be confounded with that Younger Cupid, the mischievous 
 son of Venus, and youngest of all the gods of Olympus. No 
 doubt the former suggested the latter, and the attributes of both 
 were the same, viz: Love, Archery, Nudity, Blindness, and Per- 
 petual Youth. 
 
 In the personality of the Elder Cupid, the ancients symbolized 
 the ultimate atom of matter. His birth from the Egg of Night 
 finely expresses the origin of the atoms on the bosom of the dark 
 primeval void. The attribute of Love shadows forth the law of 
 the attraction of Gravitation, for the bond which draws atom to 
 atom may be likened to the sentiment of Love ; he was gifted with 
 Archery, for the attraction of gravity may be said to radiate from 
 the atoms themselves — shot forth as it were — and works through 
 great distances as well as small; he was represented Nude, for 
 the atom is the ultimate form of matter, without parts, and may 
 therefore be said to be without dress or covering;* he was blind, 
 
 * The atom, considered simply as matter, is destitute of parts, but considered 
 as the agent, by means of which the material universe has been brought into 
 existence, it becomes the most complex of all created things, for it carries with 
 it the innumerable laws which the Creator impressed upon it in the beginning. 
 The unfolding of these laws, as we shall see in the next chapter, constitutes 
 true evolution. The sixty-seven elements known to the chemist are the vari- 
 ous combinations which the atoms assume. 
 1 
 
2 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 for the atoms attract one another without discrimination ; * he was 
 gifted with perpetual youth, for the atom knows no change, f but 
 is the same now as it was in the beginning of things.:}: In this 
 old fable, whose origin is traced into the dim obscurity of a n^tho- 
 logical age, we see epitomized the modern theory of evolution. 
 After a long sleep of centuries, buried beneath the dust and ashes 
 of system on system of philosophy, it again emerges to the light 
 of day. The atomic doctrine is first spoken 6f in connection with 
 the name of Leucippus. This philosopher belonged to the Eleatic § 
 school, which was established by Xenophanes about 500 B. C. 
 Leucippus was a pupil of Zeno of Elea, who was a disciple of 
 Parmenides, who, in his turn, was a disciple of Xenophanes. This 
 school was distinguished for its cultivation of the physical sciences. 
 Leucippus surpassed all his predecessors, and first promulgated the 
 atomic theory of the Universe advocated later on by Epicurus and 
 Lucretius, and revived in modern times by Bruno, Kant, and La- 
 place. Democritus followed in the footsteps of his master, Leu- 
 cippus, and taught that the whole Universe consists of atoms, which 
 once existed equally diffused throughout space. These atoms were 
 in perpetual motion and gradually coalesced into masses through 
 the influence of attractive energy, and in course of time the whole 
 Universe was evolved. But, whilst history points to Leucippus 
 and his disciple, Democritus, as the founders of the atomic doc- 
 trine, there is every reason to believe that the theory had been pro- 
 mulgated long prior to their time, and the existence of the fable 
 referred to in the beginning of this chapter seems to strengthen this 
 conjecture. It is highly probable that the idea of atoms originated 
 in the East, that great store-house of ancient' learning. It was a 
 universal custom among the early Greek philosophers, with those, 
 
 * The law of universal attraction, discovered by Newton, or rather formu- 
 lated by him, postulates that every atom in the universe attracts every other 
 atom. 
 
 fThe great diversity of form which matter has assumed can only be ex- 
 plained by the workings of the laws with which it has been united. The 
 phase or form which matter takes thus becomes the material manifestation of 
 pre-existing ideas. 
 
 | See Bacon's interpretation of this fable in his "Wisdom of the Ancients." 
 
 § Xenophanes, the founder of the Eleatic school, was a disciple of Pytha- 
 goras, who established a school at Crotoua, in Italy. 
 
Historical Sketch. 8 
 
 at least, with whom we are acquainted, to spend some years of 
 study and travel, and they often penetrated as far as India in quest 
 of knowledge. It was thence that Pythagoras derived his doctrine 
 of metempsychosis, or transmigration of souls, and it is possible 
 that he obtained his knowledge of the true nature of the solar 
 system from the same source, either directly or indirectly.* In 
 the early civilizations, fable or allegory was the dress in which the 
 doctrines of the wise were concealed from the common herd of 
 mortals. The masses of the people were never initiated into the 
 deep mysteries of nature, hidden under these allegories. Nor 
 would it have been wise to have attempted such instruction, for 
 the general intelligence was too low to receive such high truths, 
 and their promulgation could have resulted only in mystification 
 to the pupil and ruin to the teacher. 
 
 Thus, while the people at large were steeped in ignorance and 
 practiced superstitious observances to more than a hundred gods, 
 the philosophic minds of the favored few arose to heights of refined 
 abstraction, which the human intellect has never since surpassed. 
 Prior to the time of Leucippus, nearly all the old Greek philos- 
 ophers recognized the existence of a supreme spiritual essence, 
 (knowledge of which they had derived from the East,) which per- 
 vaded all things and to which all things were due. With many 
 of them this idea was refined into a pure monotheism, or belief in 
 a supreme intellectual personality, the Creator of all things. 
 
 The advent of Leucippus marked an era in philosophy, for he 
 seemed to find in the ultimate atoms of matter, and the forces in- 
 herent in them, an all-sufficing cause of the origin of things, and he 
 seems to have entirely ignored the existence of a spiritual element 
 in the Universe. This philosophy has been revived from time to 
 time since his day, and in the modern monistic philosophy we find 
 exactly the same ideas of the ultimate nature of things embodied. 
 
 The atheistical doctrines of Leucippus and Democritus found 
 able antagonists in the three greatest of all the Greeks, Socrates, 
 
 * Pythagoras, the most illustrious physician and philosopher of his day, 
 taught that the sun waj in the center of the solar system and that the planets 
 revolved around it. His master, Thales, was also acquainted with the true 
 nature of the solar system. It is, therefore, likely that he obtained his 
 knowledge from Thales, who possibly derived his from the East, for he was a 
 great traveler. 
 
4 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Plato, and Aristotle. In the refined idealistic minds of Socrates 
 and Plato, the spiritual reigned as the great tangible reality upon 
 which all things rested for support ; with them matter was of sec- 
 ondary importance, and bears the same relation to spirit that the 
 shadow does to real substance. Aristotle, like his great preceptor, 
 Plato, was thoroughly imbued with the spiritual reality underlying 
 all things, but he also recognized the importance of studying the 
 baser substance, and so successful was he in his physical inquiries 
 that he not only surpassed all his predecessors, but the limits which 
 he marked are still, in many directions, the bounding lines of our 
 knowledge. His acquaintance with biology was so extensive and 
 minute that it enabled him to rise to some of the grandest general- 
 izations of comparative anatomy, and to make discoveries which 
 have only been re-discovered in comparatively recent times. 
 
 It is almost certain that he thoroughly understood the circulation 
 of the blood, afterwards re-discovered by Servetus and Harvey. 
 He knew that the young of certain species of shark are partially 
 developed in the mother's body by a kind of placental attachment 
 This fact was only re-discovered as late as 1839, by Johannes 
 Muller, of Berlin. He was acquainted with the method of devel- 
 opment of the cuttle-fish, and the peculiar manner of propagation 
 among bees. The absurdities and inconsistencies which are found 
 in his writings must be attributed to corruptions. 
 
 Aristotle's advantages for the study of biology were peculiarly 
 great, for he was the preceptor of Alexander, and the Conqueror 
 of the East spared no pains to supply his teacher with the rarest 
 specimens of animal and vegetable life. A corps of collectors 
 always accompanied him, and the specimens were finally handed 
 over to Aristotle for his examination. Whilst Alexander did all 
 in his power to assist his master by furnishing him the means of 
 making his discoveries, he was also anxious *to monopolize the 
 discoveries that his master made, and did all he could to discourage 
 and prevent their publication. This ambitious king wished to be 
 without a rival in learning as well as in war.* 
 
 * " Very few of the writings of Aristotle were published during his life- 
 time. Among these few were probably his Poetics and his Art of Rhetoric. 
 The rest of his works he bequeathed to Theophrastus, who left them to Neleus , 
 Scepsius; the latter sold a part of them to Ptolemy Philadelphos, and these 
 perished in the burning of the Alexandrian library. The rest were buried, 
 
Historical Sketch. 5 
 
 After the subjugation of the Persian Empire, Alexander wrote 
 to Aristotle as follows : "Alexander wishing prosperity to Aris- 
 totle. You have not done right in publishing your acroamatic 
 works; for in what shall we surpass others, if the doctrines in 
 which we were instructed become common to all men ? I, indeed, 
 would rather excel others in the knowledge of the most excellent 
 things than in power." To this Aristotle returned the following- 
 answer : "Aristotle to King Alexander, wishing prosperity. You 
 wrote to me concerning my acroamatic works,* thinking that they 
 ought not to have been divulged. Know, therefore, that they are 
 published, and not published, for they can be understood by 
 my auditors alone. Farewell. "f From this it is apparent that 
 much of the obscurity in the writings of Aristotle was studied by 
 him. 
 
 Aristotle's great genius and knowledge led him to speculate upon 
 the relations which the phenomena of nature bear to one another, 
 and taught him to recognize the power of nature in modifying the 
 animal frame, thus enabling him to anticipate the modern theories 
 of development. After discussing the whys and wherefores of 
 certain natural phenomena, he makes the same inquiry with re- 
 gard to animals. " What prevents that the parts in nature (of an 
 animal) may thus subsist? For example, that the teeth should 
 originate from necessity, those in front sharp, and fitted for divid- 
 ing, but the grinders broad and adapted for crushing the food. It 
 may be argued that they were not made for this purpose, but that 
 it so chanced ; and similarly with other parts of the body, which 
 apparently exist for some definite purpose. Where, therefore, all 
 things occurred as if they were intended for some special end, 
 
 as is said, for the sake of preservation, in some subterraneous vault, where 
 they lay forgotten for one hundred and thirty years, and at their recovery 
 were found in a very defective state from decay. In that state they fell into 
 the hands of Apellicon of Teos, who supplied the deficiencies from his own 
 invention. They came, finally, into the possession of Tyrannion, the gram- 
 marian, who used the same freedom to a greater degree. Hence we must 
 make much allowance for the imperfection, obscurity, and, perhaps, contra- 
 diction, which may be found in the writings of Aristotle as they now appear." — 
 Tytler's Universal History. 
 
 *The "Physics" and "Metaphysics" are here referred to. 
 
 t Quoted by Taylor. 
 
6 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 these were preserved, being properly constituted by an internal 
 tendency ; but things that were not thus constituted were lost, and 
 are still lost."* 
 
 Aristotle here recognizes the mutability of animal forms, through 
 the agency of an internal tendency and the elective power of na- 
 ture confirming and assisting this tendency. A little further on 
 he ably combats the chance philosophy of Leucippus and Demo- 
 critus, by showing that .Design is as clearly exhibited by nature in 
 her workings as it is in man's. And he bases his argument on 
 unassailable ground by pointing out that if Democritus considers 
 man's mind as a part of nature, (which he must necessarily do, for 
 he postulates that the atoms produced all things,) it is obvious that, 
 to be consistent, he must ascribe Design to nature as much in one 
 form as in another, and that, consequently, if he attributes Design 
 to mans tvorks, he must also allow it to the rest of nature. He 
 says: "There is, therefore, an existence for some special end in 
 things which are produced by nature. Again, in things where 
 there is a definite end to be attained, the cause of these things is 
 originated for the sake of this end. Accordingly, therefore, as it 
 is brought about, so is it intended by nature to be brought about ; 
 and according to the natural tendency of any tiling so will it be 
 produced, unless there is some impediment.^ Now, that which is 
 produced is produced for some special end, and, hence, it was in- 
 tended by nature to be produced for the sake of this end. For 
 example, if a house ranked among the things which are naturally 
 produced, it would be built by nature in the same way as it is now 
 by art. Also, if things which are now produced by nature only 
 were also produced by art, they would be produced in a similar 
 manner, and according to a natural tendency. The one, therefore, 
 would exist for the sake of the other (the natural tendency would 
 exist for the object to be attained) ; and, indeed, art partly imi- 
 tates natural processes in perfecting the things which nature is in- 
 capable of bringing to perfection. If, therefore, artificial things 
 are produced for the sake of something, it is evident that this is 
 
 * Physical Auscultations, Book II, chapter viii. 
 
 t Here is a recognition of the power of External nature to influence Internal 
 nature, (i. e., the inherent tendency of the individual,) and to elect those vari- 
 ations which are most suitable for the individual to adapt itself to surrounding 
 conditions. 
 
Historical Sketch. 7 
 
 also the case with things which nature has produced. * 
 
 Hence, if the swallow forms her nest, and the spider her web, for 
 a special object, and if plants bring forth leaves for the sake of 
 the fruit, and the roots tend downward, and not upward, for the 
 sake of nourishment, it is evident that a cause of this kind (i. e., 
 a cause of special Design) belongs to those things which are pro- 
 duced by nature."* 
 
 £sone of the writings of Deinocritus, nor of his master, Leueip- 
 pus, have descended to our own times,'butwe learn through Aristotle 
 and other ancient writers, that their philosophy was essentially as 
 follows : They asserted that, in the beginning of things, the Uni- 
 verse consisted of an infinite number of self-existent atoms in a 
 perpetual state of motion. These atoms were not only infinite in 
 number, but they were also of innumerable shapes. + They reasoned 
 that, if the atoms were all exactly alike in figure, the resulting 
 combinations would also be similar, hence there could be no variety 
 in the forms of matter. They could, therefore, only reconcile their 
 theory to the existing order of things by giving the atoms differ- 
 ent shapes, and assigning a different order and position to each in 
 forming the various combinations which make up the Universe. 
 Figure, Order, and Position of the atoms formed the tripod upon 
 which they rested their theory of the Universe. As they recog- 
 nized no intelligent power independent of and superior to matter, 
 they were compelled to ascribe the order and position in which the 
 atoms fell to the attraction which atoms of the same shape had 
 for one another. This innate tendency on the part of the atoms 
 to attract those of like shape was materially assisted by the chance 
 combinations which would result from the atoms moving among 
 one another throughout an infinite time. To this fortuitous com- 
 ing together, and the mutual attraction of similars, they ascribe the 
 origin of all things. Aristotle combats this theory, that the atoms 
 are the first cause of things, by proving that the atoms cannot be 
 infinite in number, for if they were, universal space would be so 
 filled with them that all motion would be impossible, and the ivhole 
 
 * Physical Auscultations, Book II, chapt. viii. 
 
 t Modern scientists hold that all the atoms are exactly alike, and attribute the 
 various forms which matter assumes to a difference of combination. 
 
8 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Universe ivould be a Solid Mass. The mere fact that the atoms can 
 move among one another is demonstrative proof that all space 
 cannot befitted, hence, the number of the atoms cannot be Infinite. 
 
 This being proved, he further shows that the perpetual duration 
 of motion, which Democritus postulates, can have no existence, 
 for such a motion presupposes an Infinite power. But how can 
 an' Infinite Power exist in, or be exerted by, a. Finite Magnitude ? 
 (i. e., a finite number of atoms.) 
 
 Having thus destroyed the airy fabric of Democritus, he pro- 
 ceeds to show that there is an Original Motive force outside of 
 matter, and that the First Mover has no Corporeal existence (is 
 spiritual in its nature) ; that it is Immovable, (knows no change,) 
 and Indivisible ; in other words, that it is an Intelligent will-power 
 which holds matter in subjection, and can impress upon it, if it so 
 will, an infinite motion both in duration and extent. In the closing 
 chapter of the " Physics," he completes his great argument against 
 the Materialism of Democritus, thus : 
 
 " Hence, that motion only is perpetual which is produced by the 
 Immovable, for, always existing the same, it will always bear the 
 same relation to that which is moved. These things being de- 
 termined, it is evident that it is impossible for that which First 
 Moves and is Immovable to have any Magnitude (material ex- 
 istence) ; for, if it had, it must of necessity be either Finite or 
 Infinite. Now, it has already been demonstrated that it is impos- 
 sible that there could be an Infinite Magnitude, and it has just been 
 proved that infinite motion could not be produced by a finite 
 magnitude ; but as the first mover does jjroduce a motion perpetual 
 in duration and infinite in extent, hence, it is evident that It (the 
 first mover) is Indivisible, ivithout parts, and has no Magnitude (no 
 material existence.") 
 
 Aristotle thus defeats Democritus with his own weapons, and 
 demonstrates the absurdity of his doctrine ; and proves that all 
 things are suspended from an Infinite Intelligence, and in this he 
 agrees with Plato, who, in his Timaeus, discovers the Supreme In- 
 telligence, the Creator of the Universe. 
 
 Epicurus, (B. C. 342-270,) the founder of the celebrated sect 
 of that name, in his physical philosophy followed to a great extent 
 in the footsteps of Democritus. An elaborate exposition of his 
 views, which correspond essentially with those of Democritus, has 
 
Historical Sketch. 9 
 
 come down to us in the writings of Lucretius, who lived during 
 the first century B. C. Lucretius embodied his philosophy in a 
 poem entitled " I)e Natura Rerum." He discusses at great length 
 the ultimate nature of things, and demonstrates that there must be 
 ultimate particles of matter which are absolutely solid, unchangeable, 
 and indestructible. He shows that all space cannot be completely 
 filled with these atoms, otherwise all motion would be impossible. 
 He ascribes the various forms which matter assumes to the various 
 combinations, and shows that there must be a multitude of different 
 figures in these atoms, else their combinations would all be similar 
 in character. He recognizes no intelligent power outside of matter, 
 and asserts that the atoms are self-existent, and have been moving 
 through space from all eternity, and that they have fallen into 
 their present combinations by chance. He regards the mind as a 
 subtle kind of matter, (composed of atoms of a special size and 
 figure,) which undergoes dissolution with the body and returns to 
 its original atomic state. The personality of the individual is, 
 therefore, annihilated at death, and for Lucretius there is no im- 
 mortality.* 
 
 "Hence, death is nought, and justly claims our scorn, 
 Since with the body thus the soul decays. 
 And as we now, through long anterior time, 
 Look back indifferent on the Punic hosts 
 That threatened Rome, when, with the din of war, 
 All shook tremendous heaven's high cope beneath, 
 And doubtful hung the scale which power should rule 
 Earth, main, and mortals, with unrivaled sway; 
 So, when we cease, and soul and body once 
 Meet their joint doom whose union formed our lives, 
 No ill shall then molest us — nought alarm 
 Our scattered senses, and dissevered frame, 
 Though earth with main, or main commix with skies. 
 E'en could the soul, the spirit, still survive 
 The wreck corporeal, and perception boast, 
 To us what boots it, who exist alone 
 The joint result of soul and body mixt? 
 
 * The Monistic philosophers of to-day, among whom we may mention 
 Hasckle, Spencer, Huxley, and Tyndall, hold essentially these same views 
 They recognize no spiritual element in the mind, but regard intelligence as a 
 result of atomic action, pure and simple. Hence, with them, there is no im- 
 mortality. 
 
10 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 To us what boots it, should some future time 
 Collect our atoms, the dismantled frame 
 Restore entire, and e'en with life relume, 
 When once the memory of ourselves is fled?" * 
 
 Thus the poet sums up his non-belief in a future state, and tells 
 us that death is the goal of existence. The materialistic doctrines 
 of Lucretius, like those of his predecessor, Democritus, find a full 
 and sufficient refutation in the sublime arguments of Aristotle. 
 
 Having shown that the doctrine of evolution is hoary-headed 
 with age, and that its origin may be traced to a high antiquity, we 
 will spend no more time in following its course and progress among 
 the ancients, but descend to more modern times. 
 
 The philosophy, literature, and art, for which Greece was so 
 highly distinguished among the nations of antiquity, rapidly dimin- 
 ished under the preponderating power of Eome. The policy of 
 that state was one of conquest, and the great aim of all her rulers 
 was to establish her military supremacy and to extend the limits 
 of her empire. The road to preferment and distinction lay through 
 the exercise of those faculties which we possess in common with 
 the brutes, and rapine and bloodshed furnished the only channels 
 in which men could excel their fellows with the hope of reward. 
 Rome was a military power in the most comprehensive sense of 
 the word, and, when not engaged in subduing intestine troubles 
 or repelling foreign invaders, she was occupied in extending the 
 sway of her arms and enlarging the boundaries of her dominions. 
 This warlike spirit, which she inherited, in common with all na- 
 tions, from savage beginnings, had never been mitigated by the 
 softening and exalting influence of intellectual pursuits. Litera- 
 ture, science, and art, she had none primarily, and what she did 
 ultimately possess was the offspring of her contact with the higher 
 civilization of Greece. But in a nation where the highest distinc- 
 tions and rewards are reserved for achievements in war, a high 
 degree of civilization is not to be looked for. In the savage state, 
 war is the common occupation of men, and just in proportion as 
 civilization advances does the warlike spirit disappear, and men 
 of intellect, in cultivating the arts of peace, seek to distinguish 
 themselves in a more rational way than by murdering their fellow- 
 men. Hence it is that, in the most civilized nations of the nine- 
 
 * Lucretius. Translated by Good. 
 
Historical Sketch. 11 
 
 teenth century, the military profession is held in such disesteem 
 that few, if any, men of eminent intellectual merit are found iden- 
 tified with it* And this is even the case among the monarchies 
 of Europe, where the traditions of a barbarous age are still in the 
 ascendant, and where the power of the sovereign largely depends 
 upon a huge standing army for its support. But in the United 
 States, where civilization has attained its highest development^ 
 where individual merit receives its highest reward — not the reward 
 which the breath of kings and princes can confer, but the distinc- 
 tion which the approbation of an enlightened people can give — the 
 military establishment is reduced to nominally nothing, and the 
 occupation of the soldier, in times of peace, is regarded with in- 
 difference and contempt. Grecian learning found but little en- 
 couragement in warlike Rome, and the great thinkers she produced 
 are few and far between. The uninterrupted wars, both at home 
 and abroad, and the slight esteem in which learning was held, were 
 not favorable to intellectual pursuits. Later on the inroads of the 
 northern barbarians, and the subsequent fall of the Roman power, 
 almost annihilated taste for letters. What is known as the dark- 
 ages now began to settle like a funeral pall over the world, and 
 for a period of nearly a thousand years violence and anarchy reigned 
 supreme and all learning was confined to the priesthood. In the 
 seclusion of their cells, the monks busied themselves in transcribing 
 the writings of the ancients, and it is to their industry that we are 
 indebted for what remains to us of Greek and Latin literature. 
 The middle age may be regarded as the period during which the 
 seeds of Grecian and Roman civilization, scattered broadcast by 
 the storms of war among the barbarous nations of the north, were 
 germinating ; slowly but surely the tender plant reared its head, 
 and, as it grew, enriched the soil around it. which, reacting, caused 
 that rapid growth which soon enabled it to defy the warring of 
 
 *This fact has been pointed out at some length by Buckle in his history of 
 civilization. 
 
 t That nation must be regarded as the most highly civilized in which knowl- 
 edge is most widely diffused among the masses of the people. No one who 
 knows anything of the condition of the masses in Europe will deny that the 
 United States enjoys the distinction of being the most enlightened nation on 
 the earth. Free institutions depend upon the capabilities of a nation for self- 
 government, and such capabilities pre-suppose a high degree of enlightenment' 
 
12 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 adverse elements. The invention of printing, that great engine 
 of enlightenment, gave an impulse to civilization the importance 
 of which cannot be exaggerated. It arose upon the horizon of 
 the dark ages the harbinger of a brighter era, and the clouds of 
 ignorance and superstition fled before it like the mists of the morn- 
 ing at the appearance of the effulgent god of day. The diffusion 
 of knowledge, and the general intellectual elevation thereby in- 
 duced, is a surer test for the degree of civilization which a nation 
 has attained than any other ; and this general diffusion of knowl- 
 edge is the grand distinguishing feature of the civilization of modern 
 times as compared with that of the past. It is not that we have 
 attained to higher individual elevation, for the past history of the 
 world furnishes innumerable examples of individual genius which 
 later ages cannot parallel ; but the high mountain-peak is bathed 
 in light whilst the valley below is buried in shadow, and the light 
 which it reflects may be as a beacon to a far distant traveler, while 
 the wayfarer at its base may be groping helplessly along in the 
 darkness. 
 
 The sacred fire of genius in its lofty soarings catches the first 
 rays of truth, and transmits the light it receives to far distant ages 
 for the guidance of future nations, whilst the age which gave it 
 birth may be so steeped in ignorance and superstition as to be un- 
 able to avail itself of the light in its midst. 
 
 Thus, a nation may possess a science, a literature, and an art 
 enriched by the highest gifts of genius, but if that science and that 
 literature are confined to a favored few, whilst the people at large 
 wallow in ignorance, that nation cannot be said to have attained 
 a high degree of civilization. 
 
 The rapid growth of all branches of knowledge which followed 
 the invention of printing is demonstrative proof that the more 
 widely knowledge is diffused the greater will its progress be, for 
 a greater number of individuals will be engaged in its advance- 
 ment. The first step made in our modern civilization was the re- 
 vival of the learning of the ancients. Their works, which monk- 
 ish industry had preserved from utter destruction, were rapidly 
 reproduced, and there soon arose a class of thinkers who, untram- 
 elled by the narrowing influences of Romish superstition, repro- 
 mulgated to the world those great truths which ancient genius had 
 discovered. 
 
Historical SIcelch. 13 
 
 Few, indeed, are the great lights which illumine the dark period 
 prior to the invention of printing; and the names of Albertus 
 Magnus and Roger Bacon stand oat like brilliant beacons in a 
 black tempestuous night.* In 1473, about thirty-three years after 
 the discovery of printing by Guttenberg, was born the celebrated 
 physician, astronomer, and mathematician, Nicolas Copernicus. 
 He either revived or rediscovered the Pythagorean theory of the 
 solar system, with which his name is now identified. Copernicus 
 died a short time after the promulgation of his great doctrine. 
 Had he lived, he would, in all probability, have suffered the per- 
 secution which subsequently compelled Galileo to recant his belief 
 in the same theory. The sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are 
 particularly rich in great names, and the sciences made rapid pro- 
 gress. 
 
 The Italian, Giordano Bruno, was among the first to revive the 
 atomic theory of the universe, for which he suffered death at the 
 stake in 1600. He was followed by Gassendi, who, about the year 
 1647, published a work on the life and writings of Epicurus. 
 About the same period, Descartesf gave his theory of " Yortices " 
 to the world. These three names are to be regarded as the modern 
 precursors of Kant and Laplace, and the first to repromulgate the 
 theory of Evolution as applied to the inorganic Universe. 
 
 Medicine, the mother of the sciences, which, during the preced- 
 ing period of the Middle Ages had been almost entirely confined 
 to the priesthood, now became a favorite study with every mind 
 
 * Albertus Magnus, a Dominican monk, who became Vicar General of his 
 order, and Bishop of Ratisbon. 
 
 He was distinguished for his skill in medicine ; and his general learning was 
 so great that he was accredited with having dealings with the devil. B. in 
 Suabia, 1205; d. 1282. 
 
 Roger Bacon, an English Franciscan monk, who received his education at 
 the University of Oxford. He was a skillful physician, and wrote extensively 
 on medical subjects. He is the reputed inventor of the air-pump, diving-bell, 
 camera obscura, gunpowder, and the telescope, which Galileo afterwards re- 
 invented. B. 1214; d. 1292. 
 
 fThis celebrated man, in his moral doctrine, took the ground that there 
 must be a Supreme Divine Intelligence, otherwise the mind could not conceive 
 of such a being. 
 
 " J'ai tire la preuve de l'existence de Dieu de l'idee que je trouve en moi 
 d'un etre souverainment parfait." 
 
14 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 which sought an intimate acquaintance with nature ; and the 'sci- 
 ences of anatomy and physiology, which had made little or no pro- 
 gress since the days of Galen, now made wonderful strides.* 
 
 To these early students of anatomy, we owe our first knowledge 
 of the development of the human body from its embryonic, or 
 germ, state. The importance of such a knowledge for the farther 
 progress of the doctrine of Evolution will be appreciated later. 
 
 The most distinguished of these early students of Embryology 
 were Fabricius ab Aquapendenti and Spigelius, professors at the 
 University of Padua, whose works were published at the beginning 
 of the seventeenth century. They were followed by Marcel lo 
 Malpighi, of Bologna, and Harvey and Needham, in England. 
 
 A theory of Evolution now sprang up which became known as 
 the theory of u Encasement" or "Preformation." According to 
 this theory, all the parts of the perfectly-developed organism ex- 
 isted, preformed in the Egg, but extremely minute, and these parts 
 were simply enlarged by growth during the progress of Gestation. 
 This theory of "preformation" or "encasement" was probably 
 suggested by the Homceomerianf doctrine of Anaxagoras, who 
 flourished in the fifth century before Christ.:}: From Lucretius we 
 learn that he believed " that bones are produced from little bones, 
 that flesh is from small particles of flesh, and that blood is formed 
 from many particles of blood meeting together. The discovery of 
 the Sperm Cell of the male by Leeuwenhoek, in 1690, caused a di- 
 vision of the Preformationists into two parties ; the one holding 
 that the parts preexisted in the male, whilst the other maintained 
 the old theory, that they existed in the female, and the male ele- 
 ment simply gave an impetus to their development. 
 
 * The only progress which medicine made during the Middle Ages was ac- 
 complished by the Arabians, and some of their writers became celebrated all 
 over Europe. An anecdote, which will illustrate the esteem in which the 
 writings of the Arabians were held at this period, is related of Louis XI, of 
 France. Wishing to borrow the works of the celebrated Arabian physician, 
 Rhasis, from the faculty of Medicine at Paris, he was compelled to deposit a 
 large quantity of valuable plate, and to procure a nobleman to join with him 
 in a deed, by which he bound himself to return it, under a considerable for- 
 feiture. 
 
 t Homoios, like ; and Meros, part. 
 
 X Anaxagoras, one of the most distinguished physicians and philosophers of 
 antiquity. (500—428 B. C.) 
 
Historical Sketch. 15 
 
 The celebrated Leibnitz (b. 1646 ; d. 1716) advocated this latter 
 theory. He was among the first to formulate the law of the Con- 
 tinuous Gradation of Created Beings. The theory of Encasement 
 was advocated by the great physiologist Haller,* and received 
 apparent support from the investigations of the Swiss naturalist, 
 Charles Bonnet, who, about the year 1745, discovered the so-called 
 virginal generation (Parthenogenesis) of plant lice.f 
 
 In the year 1759, the labors of Caspar Frederick Wolff:}: com- 
 pletely overturned the theory of Preformation, and he conclusively 
 demonstrated the truth of his new doctrine of Epigenesis,§ or the 
 gradual formation of new parts during the progress of development. 
 With this discovery, the modern doctrine of Evolution, in so far 
 as it relates to the development of organic life, properly begins. 
 He proved that the parts of the perfect animal did not preexist 
 as minute organs, but that they were newly formed during the 
 development of the Embryo. Embryology made but little pro- 
 gress until the celebrated von Baer took up the clew furnished by 
 Wolff, and his exhaustive study of the development of the animal 
 body from the Egg placed the science uponits present firm footing. 
 He showed that the first step in the development of the Egg con- 
 sists in the breaking up of the yelk into cells, and the subsequent 
 production of germ layers from these cells. 
 
 The atomic hypothesis, for the revival of which Bruno suffered, 
 received a new impetus at the hands of Emanuel Kant, (1724- 
 1804,) Sir W. Herschel, (1738-1822,) and the great French math- 
 ematician Laplace, (1749-1827,) with which names, especially the 
 latter, the " Nebular Hypothesis " has become identified. 
 
 * The distinguished physician and poet, Albrecht von Haller, (1708-1777,) 
 professor at the University of Gottingen, and known as the " Father of 
 Phisiology." He formulated his belief in the phrase u Nulla Est Epigenesis." 
 
 t Bonnet isolated a female plant louse from contact with the male, and in a 
 month's time she gave birth to ninety-five female young. They multiplied in 
 the same virgin manner. This was considered demonstrative of the truth of 
 " Preformation." 
 
 + Wolff was born at Berlin 1733. He took his degree of Doctor in Medicine 
 at the University of Halle, and subsequently accepted an invitation from the 
 Empress Catharine, of Russia, to reside at St. Petersburg, where he died in 
 1794. 
 
 § Harvey really preceded him in the enunciation of this doctrine, but Wolff 
 elaborated it. 
 
16 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Kant was probably the most profound thinker of the last cen- 
 tury, and the range of his knowledge was enormous. 
 
 The doctrine of Evolution, which he advocated in the develop- 
 ment of worlds from a nebulous mass, he also extended to the 
 world of life, but he held that the first germ of life on the globe 
 was a direct act of creative power. Whilst he recognized the doc- 
 trine of Evolution, both in the animate and inanimate world, his 
 great mind prevented him from falling into the Slough of Mate- 
 rialism which has been the fate of so many before and since his 
 time. His studies into nature's hidden secrets only served to 
 heighten his conception of the ideal world, and of that Intelligent 
 Power to whom all things are due. He was willing to allow that 
 man's body might have been developed from a lower order of 
 creation, but he never lost sight of the great truth, that the real 
 man is a Spiritual Substance, which, in its nature, has no affinity 
 to the clay in which it lies entombed. He does not seem to have 
 accepted the theory of Evolution until quite late in life, and in 
 his " Critique of Pure Reason " he thus criticises the theories of 
 Leibnitz : 
 
 " The so-called law discovered by Leibnitz, and supported with 
 remarkable ability by Bonnet * * the law of the continuous 
 gradation of created beings, which is nothing more than an infer- 
 ence from the principles of affinity ; for observation and study of 
 the order of nature could never present it to the mind as an ob- 
 jective truth. The steps of this ladder, as they appear in ex- 
 perience, are too far apart from each other, and the so-called petty 
 differences between different kinds of animals are in nature com- 
 monly so wide separations that no confidence can be placed in such 
 views."* 
 
 That he changed his mind later in life his subsequent writings 
 show. 
 
 The philosophic mind of the middle and latter half of the 
 eighteenth century dwelt much on the question of man's origin, 
 and conjectures on the subject may be found in the writings of 
 many of the great intellects of the period. 
 
 Diderot, writing about the middle of the century, says : 
 
 "Imagine the fingers of the hand united, and the matter of th,e 
 
 * " Critique of Pure Eeason." Translated by Meikle John. 
 
Historical Sketch. 
 
 17 
 
 nails so abundant that, becoming extended and enlarged, it envel- 
 opes the whole; instead of the hand of man, you will have the foot 
 of a horse. When we see the successive changes of the exterior 
 of the prototype, whatever that may have been, approaching one 
 kingdom from another kingdom by insensible degrees, and peo- 
 pling the confines of these two kingdoms, (if it is permitted to 
 use the term confines where there is no real division,) and peo- 
 pling, did I say, the confines of two kingdoms with uncertain 
 and ambiguous beings, deprived, in a great measure, of the quali- 
 ties and functions of the one, and invested with the form, qualities, 
 and functions of the other, who does not feel himself influenced to 
 believe that there never has been but one first being, the prototype of 
 all beings V* A little farther on he refers to this theory as being 
 held by Dr. Baumann, but rejected by Buffon, nor does he state 
 whether he himself is a convert to the doctrine. Both Helvetius 
 (1715-1771) and Condillac (1715-1780) advocated the theory of 
 development, and applied it to the moral world as well. The 
 former in his " De l'Esprit," and the latter in his " Traite des Sen- 
 sations," work out an elaborate system of Utilitarian philosophy, 
 and openly avow Atheistical principles. 
 
 Dr. Erasmus Darwin, (grandfather of Charles Darwin,) who at- 
 tained the highest distinction as physician, poet, and naturalist, 
 writes in his " Zoonomia." which appeared in 1794: "All warm- 
 blooded animals have arisen from one living filament, which the 
 first great cause endued with animality, with the power of acquiring 
 new parts, attended with new propensities, directed by irritations, 
 sensations, volitions, and associations; and thus possessing the 
 faculty of continuing to improve by its own inherent activity." 
 
 * Imaginez les doigts de la main reunis, et la matiere des ongles si abondante 
 que, venant a s'etendre et a se gonfler, elle enveloppe et convre le tout, au 
 lieu de la main d'un homme vous aurez le pied d'un cheval. Quand ou voit 
 les metamorphoses successives de l'enveloppe du prototype, quel qu'il ait ete, 
 approcher un rdgne d'un untre regne par des degres insensibles, et peupler 
 les confins des deux regnes (s'il est permis de se servir du terme de confins 
 ou il n'y a ancune division re elle,) et peupler, dis-je, les confins des deux 
 regnes, d'etres incertains, ambigus, depouilles en grande partie des formes, des 
 qualites et des fonctions de l'un, et revetus des formes, des quatites, des fonc- 
 tions de l'antre, qui ne se sentirait porte a croire qu'il n'y a jamais eu qu'un 
 premier etre prototype de tous les etres." 
 
 Diderot. — "De l'interpretation de la nature." 
 2 
 
18 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Here we have a clear statement of the theory of progressive devel- 
 opment. 
 
 The great German poet, Goethe, who was no less great, as a nat- 
 uralist than as a devotee of the muses, expressed similar views in 
 his morphological writings published about the same time. But 
 the most important name in connection with the theory of the 
 development of organic life, up to comparatively recent times, is 
 that of Jean Baptiste Lamarck, (b. 1744, d. 1829.) This great 
 Frenchman worked out an elaborate system, which he promulgated 
 to the world in his zoological writings published in the early part 
 of this century. f His views were combated by the celebrated 
 Cuvier, who maintained the permanence of species, and the weight 
 of his great name retarded the progress of the doctrine for many 
 years. The distinguished zoologist, GeofTroy Saint-Hilaire, es- 
 poused the cause of Lamarck and ably defended his doctrines. 
 
 Lamarck attributed the variations of the animal organism to 
 several causes. He recognized — 
 
 First. An internal tendency on the part of the individual towards 
 a higher development. 
 
 Second. The power of habit, or the use and disuse of parts. 
 
 Third. The influence of the surrounding conditions, as food, 
 climate, soil, &c. 
 
 Fourth. The crossing of existing forms. 
 
 To these four causes he refers the modification of the organism. 
 In order to explain the existence at the present time of thdse low 
 forms of life which constitute by far the greater part of the ani- 
 mated creation, he held that spontaneous generation is going on 
 all the time. He failed to recognize the fact that an organism may 
 remain for an indefinite length of time without change of struc- 
 ture, provided the external conditions remain unaltered, and that 
 
 * *" * f'.Te reconnus que la nature, obligee d'abord d'emprunter des 
 milieux environnans la puissance excitatrice des mouvemens vitaux et des ac- 
 tions des animaux imparfaits, sut, en composant de plus en plus l'organisation 
 animale, transporter cette puissance dans l'interieur meme de ces etres, et qu'S, 
 la fin, elle parvint a mettre cette meme puissance k la disposition de l'individu." 
 
 * * * "alors on eut pu apercevoir comment les besoins, d'abord reduits 
 S, nullite, et dont le nombre ensuite s'est accru graduellement, ont amene le 
 penchant aux actions propres a y satisfaire ; comment les actions devenues 
 habituelles et energiques, ont occasionne le developpement des organes qui 
 les executent." 
 
Historical Sketch. 19 
 
 it is even possible for the organism to be degraded in the scale by 
 being exposed to lowering conditions. It was reserved for Mr. 
 Darwin and Mr. Wallace to elaborate this great truth, thus render- 
 ing it no longer necessary to assume that new organisms are con- 
 stantly being produced spontaneously from inorganic matter. But 
 the age was not far enough advanced to grasp the views of La- 
 marck during his lifetime, and he died in 1829, in obscurity and 
 indigence, filled with bitterness and disappointment. 
 
 About this period, a school of philosophy, founded by the cel- 
 ebrated Saint-Simon, (1760-1825,) attracted universal attention 
 and gained many adherents and admirers, among whom was August 
 Comte, who elaborated the teachings of his master, and founded 
 what is known as the "Positive School of Philosophy.'" Comte 
 advocated the theory of evolution and applied it to the social 
 world, following in the footsteps of Helvetius, Condillac, and Con- 
 dorcet. He engrafted the peculiar "spiritual " tenets of his master 
 on his so-called Positive system, and endeavored to establish a kind 
 of religion in which human nature was the object of worship. He 
 held that the human mind passes through three stages in its medi- 
 tations upon all subjects — first, the theological ; second, the meta- 
 physical ; and third, the positive. In this last stage, the mind is 
 supposed to attain to its greatest power, and to be able to penetrate 
 into the most hidden of nature's processes, and to comprehend all 
 things connected with the laws which govern the Universe. Car- 
 rying his system to its legitimate conclusion, he looked upon man 
 as the most exalted thing in the Universe, and therefore worthy 
 of being regarded with all those feelings which constitute worship, 
 and upon this is based his religion of human nature. Many of 
 Comte's most enthusiastic admirers deserted him when this con- 
 clusion was reached, and denounced him as a crack-brain visionary, 
 thereby demonstrating their own weakness and inconsistency. 
 They were willing to go with Comte to the length of doing with- 
 out God in the world, but they shrugged their shoulders in disdain 
 when they were offered the only substitute which Comte had to 
 give as an outlet for those natural feelings which every human 
 being, not entirely besotted and brutalized, is possessed of. Let 
 the atheist, by whatever name he calls himself — whether materi- 
 alist, monist, or agnostic — ponder well the conclusions of Comte, 
 and from the cogitation his blinded vision may be restored. The 
 
20 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 rock upon which Comte was wrecked stands in the track of every 
 consistent materialist, monistic, or agnostic. 
 
 In 1844, appeared the "Vestiges of Creation," in which the views 
 of Lamarck were laid before the world in popular form, and advo- 
 cated with great ability. The author announces his belief " that 
 the several series of animated beings, from the simplest and oldest 
 up to the highest and most recent, are, under the providence of 
 God, the results, first, of an impulse which has been imparted to 
 the forms of life, advancing them, in definite times, by generation, 
 through grades of organization terminating in the highest di- 
 cotyledons and vertebrata, these grades being few in number and 
 generally marked by intervals of organic character, which we rind 
 to be a practical difficulty in ascertaining affinities; second, of an- 
 other impulse connected with the vital forces, tending, in the course 
 of generations, to modify organic structures in accordance with 
 external circumstances, as food, the nature of the habitat, and the 
 meteoric agencies, these being the 'adaptations' of the natural the- 
 ologian." 
 
 Mr. Charles Darwin tells us that he began to speculate upon the 
 subject about the year 1837, immediately after his return from a 
 voyage around the world as naturalist on board the Beagle. His 
 work on the " Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection ; 
 or, the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life," 
 appeared in the year 1859, and it was soon followed by Mr. Wal- 
 lace's work on the same subject, who had been working independ- 
 ently of Darwin. Their conclusions were essentially the same. 
 In his work on the origin of Species, Mr. Darwin did not apply 
 his theories to man, nor is there anything in the work which indi- 
 cates that he had any intention of applying it to the human race. 
 In 1863, Mr. Huxley published a work entitled " Evidences of 
 Man's Place in Nature," in which he very ably advocates man's 
 descent from the apes. He demonstrated that the apparent struc- 
 tural differences which separate man from the higher apes are not 
 greater than those which separate the highest ape from the lowest. 
 In 1871, Mr. Darwin published his "Descent of Man and Selec- 
 tion in Relation to Sex," in which he applies the theory to man 
 also. 
 
 The chief distinction in the views advocated by Lamarck and 
 Darwin has already been referred to. Both recognized the effects 
 
Historical Sketch. 21 
 
 of habit, or the use and non-use of parts, as a powerful factor in 
 natural selection; both recognized the influence "of surrounding 
 conditions in modifying the organism. But Lamarck was pos- 
 sessed with the notion of necessary progression. In advocating 
 the existence of an internal tendency toward development, he was 
 led to believe that the organism must progress in spite of external 
 conditions. Mr. Darwin showed that this linear development, im- 
 plied by Lamarck, does not exist, and advocated that the organ- 
 ism may remain stationary or even retrograde, according to sur- 
 rounding conditions. He also elaborated the great truth of " the 
 survival of the fittest in the struggle for life."' 
 
 OCT 
 
 In opposing the linear progression of Lamarck, Mr. Darwin 
 was led into the error of discarding the existence of internal tend- 
 ency on the part of the individual to attain to a higher develop- 
 ment, though he recognized the existence of an internal tendency 
 to vary. But the existence of an internal tendency to progress to 
 a higher form is not incompatible with stagnation or even retro- 
 gression ; for if the external conditions are not favorable, the organ- 
 ism will not progress, notwithstanding the existence of an internal 
 tendency in that direction. Both Lamarck and Mr. Darwin failed 
 to recognize the great truth that there has been, and doubtless still 
 is, a tendency on the part of external nature to prepare itself for the 
 reception of higher forms of life. The Geologic history of the 
 Earth demonstrates this, and the fact that life has progressed, which 
 geology also proves, renders it self-evident that there has been an 
 overruling tendency somewhere which has brought about this steady 
 progression. If we deny an innate tendency on the part of the 
 animate world, we must allow it to the external or inanimate world, 
 which, by fitting itself for higher forms of life, has solicited and 
 brought about that progressive development. Now, there are nu- 
 merous Local exceptions to this grand general law of the Earth's 
 fitting itself for the reception of higher life, and where these local 
 exceptions occur, there life will not progress — it may remain sta- 
 tionary or retrograde, and even disappear from such localities. This 
 important question will be more fully discussed later. 
 
 The name of Mr. Darwin, among English-speaking people, at 
 least, has become so closely identified with the theory of develop- 
 ment that it has come to be known as " Darwinism ;" but the 
 reader who has perused this brief historical sketch has long since 
 
22 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 observed that the growth of the theory of Evolution is an illus- 
 tration of the doctrine itself. But as it is customary and right to 
 give the first known promulgator of a doctrine the credit of dis- 
 covery, we are in equity bound to designate the doctrine of Descent 
 the Leucippian theory of the Universe, for he recognized the fact 
 that the whole Universe has been developed from preexisting 
 atoms. 
 
 In Aristotle, we see a recognition of the mutability of animal 
 forms, and the possibility of their development into higher forms. 
 Coming down to modern times, we see the theories of Leucippus 
 and Democritus revived by Bruno, and still later by Kant, Laplace, 
 and Herschel. 
 
 In the labors of Wolff, von Baer, and others, we are taught the 
 processes of Ontogenetic development, (individual development 
 from the egg.) This great step prepared the way for a compre- 
 hension of Phylogenetic development, (Race development.) 
 
 To Lamarck, Darwin, Wallace, Haeckle, Huxley, and others? 
 we are indebted for a better understanding of the laws governing 
 this phylogenetic development. The name of Darwin is more in- 
 timately associated with the theory of development than any other, 
 for the simple reason that his work appeared at a time when the 
 world was better prepared to receive such theories, and because 
 the general reader, as a rule, knew nothing of the labors of those 
 who preceded him. The laws of development, as applied to the 
 social world, though certainly recognized by the older philosophers, 
 were not elaborated until comparatively modern times. The latter 
 half of the last century was particularly rich in great thinkers on 
 the subject. 
 
 The labors of Adam Smith, Diderot, Helvetius, Condorcet, Rous- 
 seau, Condi! lac, and, still later, August Comte and J. S. Mill, are 
 particularly noteworthy. At the present time, the name of Her- 
 bert Spencer is more widely known in connection with social de- 
 velopment than any other. 
 
 The theory of development is now universally accepted by 
 nearly all scientific men as a demonstrated fact, but it has assumed 
 two widely different aspects — the Atheistical, or Monistical, those 
 who have no belief in the existence of a Divine Intelligence ; and 
 Theistical, those who recognize the existence of a Supreme Intel- 
 ligent Deity, the great first cause of all things. 
 
Historical Sketch. 23 
 
 Atheism is represented by the monistic or materialistic philoso- 
 phy, and the agnostics. The former positively deny the existence 
 of an Intelligent Deity, while the latter do not believe His existence 
 because of insufficient evidence. Their attitude, therefore, is one 
 of Passive Negation and Positive disbelief. We are, therefore, jus- 
 tified in classing them as Atheists. Mr. Darwin recognized this 
 when, in a conversation with Dr. Buchner, an avowed atheist, he 
 remarked, "I am with you in thought, but prefer the term Ag- 
 nostic to Atheist" 
 
 Among the most prominent of these agnostics, may be mentioned 
 Mr. Herbert Spencer, Tyndall, Huxley, and Bain ; among avowed 
 atheists, Haeckel, Buchner, Vogt, and Clifford. 
 
 The author of this work, in the ensuing pages, will endeavor to 
 prove that none of these gentlemen are Evolutionists, in the true 
 sense of the word ; but that the philosophy which they teach is a 
 doctrine of Involution, and not of Evolution. He will endeavor 
 to show that Evolution and Atheism, agnostic or otherwise, are 
 incompatible with one another. He will attempt to demonstrate 
 that the doctrine of Evolution furnishes the most conclusive 
 proofs of the existence of a Supreme Uncaused Being, distinct 
 from the Universe and the Author of it. 
 
24 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Chapter II 
 
 General Considerations — Evolution Defined — Spencer's System Shown to 
 be a Theory of Involution ■ Criticism of His Theories — Agnosticism — 
 Conceptions of the Uncaused Being — Creation by Evolution and In- 
 stantaneous Creation Compared. 
 
 " Let knowledge grow from more to more, 
 But more of reverence in us dwell ; 
 That mind and soul, according well, 
 May make one music as before. 
 
 But vaster * * * * * " 
 
 — Tennyson. 
 
 The Universe, both material and immaterial, is the handiwork 
 of a Supreme Divine Being, and this Uncaused Being we designate 
 God, the Creator and Sustainer of all existing things, the High and 
 Holy One who is the object of human worship. This word, (rod, 
 is of Saxon origin, being a contraction for Good,* hence the appro- 
 priateness of the word to designate the Supreme Cause of things. 
 
 Belief in the existence of a Being who is not the Universe, but 
 the author of it, lies at the very foundation of all true philosophy, 
 and all the systems of belief which are not so founded are literally 
 built on insubstantial nothing and are destined to fall. The ages 
 are strewn with the ruins of these systems, bearing testimony to 
 the absorbing interest which the great secrets of nature have had 
 for the human mind in all generations. The intellect of man is 
 so constituted by its great artificer that it is constantly reaching 
 out and endeavoring to fathom that which is beyond it ; thus every 
 success serves but as a stepping-stone for further conquests, and 
 the "goal of to-day becomes the starting-point for the morrow." 
 
 In our own individual lives we see this exemplified. ISTo sooner 
 are we possessed of the object of our desires than we see something 
 beyond which is equally desirable, and this in turn leads to some- 
 
 * Among the sages of Greece, the word Agathon (the Good) was often used 
 to designate the Supreme One. 
 
! 
 
 General Considerations. 25 
 
 thing else; and so the pursuit continues until old age, death, and 
 the grave put a quietus on all. 
 
 The history of nations is but a long catalogue of strivings, suc- 
 cesses, and defeats. The accumulated experience of one age is 
 made use of by the next, and this by the next, and so on without 
 end. From our vantage-ground of the nineteenth century, we can 
 cast ou j- eye down the long vista of the ages and appreciate the 
 gradual ascent from a primitive savage state to our present condi- 
 tion. No student of history will deny that this age stands higher 
 in the scale of development than any former age of the world. 
 No student of history will deny that the sum of human happiness 
 is greater than at any other period of the history of the world ; 
 both in material prosperity and moral well-being we stand at the 
 head of all the centuries that have preceded. 
 
 The continual striving upward and onward has slowly but surely 
 developed the infant man, who, destitute of everything except his 
 moral nature that could distinguish him from the brute, cowered 
 in his woody retreat, shuddering and shrinking with superstitious 
 dread, into the strong, reliant, intellectual power that has enslaved 
 nature and made her the willing handmaid of all his undertakings. 
 From an obdurate tyrant, nature becomes an ally and a friend, and, 
 with her assistance, man has become the undisputed lord of all 
 lower creation. The recognition of superior power is the founda- 
 tion upon which the religious beliefs of all men are based; and the 
 study of the lowest existing savage conditions furnishes us with 
 the clue by which we can follow up the development of religious 
 thought in primitive times and prior to the advent of revelation. 
 
 The lowest form of religious belief, taking its origin in the recog- 
 nition of parental authority, draws its inspiration from the objects 
 and phenomena of the natural world. These, in time, are clothed 
 with distinct personality, and the forces which nature manifests 
 come to be regarded as the will of departed ancestors. The low 
 intellect of the savage man sees in the thunder, in the lightning, 
 in the earthquake, and in the pestilence the exhibition of forces 
 which he cannot comprehend, but in the effects of which he recog- 
 nizes powers far beyond anything he himself can exercise. As 
 he contemplates the destruction and death following in the foot- 
 steps of these phenomena, awe and terror take possession of his 
 soul, and, probably, the first religious observance was an attempt 
 
26 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 to propitiate the manes of ancestors symbolized by these natural 
 forces. 
 
 His self-consciousness having been awakened by fear, he soon 
 learns to contrast with these terrifying agencies all those benignant 
 influences which directly conduce to his comfort and well-being, 
 and now, for the first time, do the feelings of gratitude and rever- 
 ence mingle with those of terror and aw r e, and, at the self-same 
 moment, he propitiates what is hurtful in nature and renders true 
 worship to that which is beneficial or good. Of all the objects in 
 nature, the sun would be the first to command these feelings of 
 reverence and gratitude. Not only is it the most conspicuous of 
 natural objects, but it is the ruler of day, the dispeller of darkness, 
 the source of light and heat, the great vivifier of all animated na- 
 ture. It is not surprising, therefore, that the sun should generally 
 hold the first place among the innumerable deities of the early 
 savage state. The savage mind has now learned to discriminate 
 between good spirits, or those agencies from which it receives 
 benefits, and evil spirits, from which it receives nothing but harm. 
 To the first, true worship, based on reverence and gratitude, is ren- 
 dered ; but the latter is regarded with fear and terror, and here 
 religious observance takes the form of propitiation. As the savage 
 intellect develops and its knowledge becomes more extended, tins 
 indiscriminate worship of natural objects and forces is narrowed 
 down, and only the more important of these agencies continue to 
 influence the mind. These are gradually clothed with distinct 
 personality, and an elaborate Polytheism, such as the early history 
 of every nation affords, is the result. It is questionable whether 
 the human mind would ever have attained to a knowledge of the 
 one Supreme Being, pure monotheism, without a special revelation. 
 However that may be, the believer in Holy Writ knows that such 
 a revelation was made, and with that revelation the historical pe- 
 riod of the human race commences. Whatsoever opinion may be 
 held as to the authorship of Genesis, this is certain, that it tran- 
 scends in antiquity all other writings which have come down to 
 us. Moses, the reputed author, lived about 1500 B. C. The best 
 authorities do not ascribe as high an antiquity to the Rig Vedas 
 of the Hindoos, which is placed from 1000 to 1400 B. C. 
 
 The distinguished archaeologist, Mr. George Smith, is of the 
 opinion that the legends of the Assyrian tables were written be- 
 
General Considerations. 
 
 27 
 
 tween 1500 and 2000 B. C. If we accept this, we must regard 
 Moses as a compiler of knowledge that existed before his time. 
 The Zendavesta, or sacred writings of the ancient Persians, sup- 
 posed to have been compiled by Zoroaster from more ancient 
 writings, is placed from 600 to 1000 B. C. 
 
 There is every reason to believe that the monotheistic concep- 
 tion of the Hindoos, involved in the idea of Brahm, or Divine Es- 
 sence of things, was derived from the same source from which the 
 Jews received their conception of one Supreme Being. The same 
 is doubtless true of the Divine Essence, recognized in the Zenda- 
 vesta, and there called Zernane Akerene. The pare monotheism 
 of the Hindoos degenerated later into the Triad, consisting of 
 Brahma, (not to be confounded with Brahm,) Vishnu, and. Siva. 
 Brahma was the creator, Vishnu the preserver, and Siva the de- 
 stroyer. This trinity of gods came to be the foundation of the 
 Brahminic religion and the objects of universal worship among 
 them. The pure spiritual ideal involved in the conception of 
 Brahm or the Divine Essence, the source of all things, was grad- 
 ually confounded by the speculative Hindoo mind with the mate- 
 rial Universe, and this gave a pantheistic turn to what was origi- 
 nally a pure spiritual monotheism. In the religion of the Zenda- 
 vesta, the Divine Essence of things was also gradually lost sight 
 of and two opposing deities came to be recognized : Ormuzd, or the 
 Good, and Ahriman, or the Evil. Ormuzd is supposed to have 
 sprung from the Divine Essence and to wage perpetual war 
 wiMi Ahriman, whom he is finally to overcome. It is obvious 
 that these two names originally were only intended to symbolize 
 the good and evil in the world, but eventually they became clothed 
 with distinct personality and to be worshipped as deities. Later 
 on, the system became still more corrupted, and fire, which was 
 originally a symbol of the Divine Essence, came to be worshipped. 
 In the fire-worshippers of modern times, we behold the relics of 
 the religion taught by Zoroaster. 
 
 The conception of one Eternal and Supreme Essence, the Crea- 
 tor of all things, and the one Being to whom all reverence and 
 homage are due, is evidently from one source, and this unity of 
 origin seems to indicate that it was in someway a special revelation 
 rather than a revelation by a natural course of intellectual -devel- 
 opment and refinement of existing polytheistical ideas. 
 
28 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 The early Greek philosophers obtained their conception of one 
 Supreme Intelligent Being from their communication with the 
 Eastern nations. Thales, (640 B. C. — 545 B. C.,) the founder of 
 the earliest Greek school of philosophy, spent years of study in 
 Egypt and Asia, and brought back with him not only the knowl- 
 edge of external nature, but also their conception of a Supreme 
 Being. 
 
 The transition from the Monotheistic conception to Pantheism 
 or Materialism was a gradual one. When man was once fully 
 awakened to the study of nature and her methods, it was not long be- 
 fore he recognized the chain of sequence of cause and effect ob- 
 servable in all her operations. The study of the secondary causes 
 of nature gradually withdrew the mind from the contemplation of 
 a Primal cause, or Spiritual Ideal, and Materialism, or Pantheism, 
 was the natural result. This Pantheistic conception of things 
 found its way to Greece, or originated there, being the result of the 
 same causes which had influenced the Hindoo mind. 
 
 Materialism, in some form or other, seems to have replaced, in a 
 great measure, the conception of a Divine Intelligence in the philo- 
 sophic mind of Greece. The philosophy of Socrates brought the 
 speculative mind back to the contemplation of the Spiritual or 
 Ideal. He suffered the punishment of death for teaching his 
 new doctrine, and for ridiculing the popular gods of his country. 
 Plato continued the teachings of his master, and everywhere in his 
 writings insists on the existence of a Supreme Intelligence. His 
 pupil, Aristotle, in his physics, attempts a logical proof of the 
 same. But notwithstanding the triumphant vindication which the 
 domain of the spiritual received at the hands of these profound 
 thinkers, the hydra-headed doctrine of materialism has survived 
 to this day. 
 
 In the philosophy of Hseckel, Spencer, Huxley, and their fol- 
 lowers, we behold the old ideas of Greece once more lifting their 
 heads; and at no time, since the palmy days of the French Ency- 
 clopedists, has it enlisted a greater number of disciples. But 
 Atheism in all its forms, whether we call it Monisticism, Pantheism, 
 Materialism, or Agnosticism, is doomed to bring about its own de- 
 struction. The demise of the Positive School, under the leader- 
 ship of August Comte, in a whirlwind of ridicule, is destined to 
 overtake the Monistic School of to-day. The only difference in 
 
General Considerations. 29 
 
 the philosophy of Comte and that of Spencer and Haeckel is that 
 Comte carried his philosophy to its legitimate conclusions, and en- 
 deavored to establish a kind of religion in which, human nature 
 was the object of worship. The absurdity of the thing was so 
 glaring that Comte was credited with having lost his senses, and 
 many of his followers deserted and denounced him. And yet, if 
 agnosticism be sound philosophy, Comte was in the right; he 
 simply recognized in man the most exalted and most dignified 
 being in the Universe, the climax of an indefinite period of de- 
 velopment, and rightly took the ground that such a being merited 
 the most august consideration. Now, as no individual man could 
 be selected who united in his single person all the virtues of the 
 race, he was compelled to take human nature in the abstract as an 
 object of worship. Comte, in establishing his religion of human 
 nature, was but following the promptings of that something within 
 us which demands an object upon which to lavish, without condi- 
 tions or limitations, our feelings of gratitude and reverence. 
 His understanding, failing to penetrate the veil of material nature, 
 and to attain to a knowledge of the one Supreme Intelligence, was 
 compelled to select the most perfect thing within reach, and that 
 thing was human nature. 
 
 Comte is to be pitied, for the noblest side of his nature — the 
 moral side — was led astray by his understanding. What his incon- 
 sistent followers called his great errors, and ridiculed him accord- 
 ingly, really became the redeeming features of his philosophy ; and, 
 in their existence in such a system of thought, we see vindicated the 
 noblest and most exalted side of human nature — that side which 
 includes all the higher emotions of thesoul: reverence, veneration, 
 gratitude. 
 
 The inevitable result of a genuine and vital belief in the existence 
 of a Divine Supreme Personality, from whom all things are suspend- 
 ed, is the calling forth of all those feelings which constitute true wor- 
 ship; and if these feelings are wanting, it is demonstrative proof 
 that the individual has no real profound conviction of the existence 
 of such a Being, though he may profess such a belief in words. 
 The greatest exponents of the atheistical philosophy of the day 
 are those who have done most to establish the doctrine of Evolu- 
 tion ; and in this doctrine of Evolution, which they have done so 
 much to establish, their own discomfiture stands revealed. The doc- 
 
30 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 trine of Evolution carries with it demonstrative proof of the exist- 
 ence of a Divine Supreme Intelligence, and in the following pages 
 it will be the aim of the author to show that Atheism and Evolution 
 are absolutely contradictory and incompatible with one another. 
 
 The study of nature affords the highest exercise of those powers 
 of the mind which distinguish us from all the lower creation ; it 
 elevates our conception of the attributes of that Being upon 
 whom it all depends, and it broadens our character and under- 
 standing, and deepens our affections. The great Galen was wont 
 to call his anatomical writings a hymn of praise to the Supreme 
 Being. The greatest intellects of all ages and nations have been 
 distinguished for their devout spirit and veneration. 
 
 The study of nature is the study of the laws of the Great First 
 Cause. These laws may be divided into two classes, peimal and 
 secondary. Secondary laws are an observed order of facts, stand- 
 ing in the relation of cause and effect to one another, and are, 
 therefore, subject to analysis. Primal laws can only be defined as 
 simple decrees. It may never fall to the lot of a created being, in 
 its study of the universe, to corne face to face with Primal law, 
 for the infinite resources of the Creator can hang law upon law 
 until the series, to a created intelligence, is practically infinite. 
 Kepler's three laws, in their relation to one another and to the law 
 of universal gravitation discovered by Newton well illustrate a 
 series of dependent secondary laws, or an observed order of facts. 
 Kepler discovered his laws by observation and as an independent 
 order of facts, and their mutual relations were not fully appreciated 
 until the law of gravity demonstrated how closely they were bound 
 together. Again, the sun's heat evaporates the waters of the 
 earth, and they rise in the air and form clouds ; these clouds are 
 finally precipitated in rain, and the rain-fall causes animal and 
 vegetable life to flourish. Here we have an observed order of 
 facts dependent upon one another as cause and effect. But it must 
 not be overlooked that each individual fact here mentioned, whilst 
 it depends upon the preceding fact, also depends upon other causes. 
 Thus, the sun's heat could not evaporate the water unless its chemi- 
 cal nature allowed such a change; nor would the clouds so formed 
 be precipitated in rain were it not for a lowered temperature and 
 the action of the law of gravity ; nor would the rain, when it 
 reaches the earth, have any effect upon animal and vegetable life 
 
General Considerations. 3 J 
 
 were it not that numerous other laws, chemical and vital, came into 
 play to bring about that result. 
 
 We are thus enabled to formulate two great facts observable in 
 natural processes : 
 
 1. Every cause is the occasion of setting on foot more than one train 
 of cause and effect. 
 
 2. Every effect is the result of more than one train of cause and 
 effect 
 
 The recognition of these two facts enables us to appreciate that 
 the secondary laws of the Universe stand in the same relation to 
 primal law that the branchlets and branches of a tree do to the 
 common trunk, and this common trunk, in its turn, has its origin 
 in the Great First Cause, the Creator and Supporter of all things. 
 
 The Universe has been created by one of two methods: either 
 by a process of Evolution or by an immediate act without the in- 
 tervention of secondary laws. The study of nature teaches us that 
 law reigns throughout, and. reasoning from analogy, we ought to 
 expect that the Universe was brought to its present state through 
 the agency of law. It will be the effort of the author of this book- 
 to prove that God created the Universe by an evolving process, 
 and not by what is known as special or immediate creation. The 
 former is just as much a creation as the latter, the only difference 
 being that in the former it was done through the agency of innu- 
 merable secondary laws and involved vast periods of time, whilst 
 in the latter it was direct and instantaneous. 
 
 Before entering upon the study of the merits of these two 
 methods, we must have a clear idea of what we are to understand 
 by the term "Evolution." 
 
 The word Evolution (from Latin evolutio) in its true significance 
 means an unfolding, and is just the reverse of Involution, (Latin 
 involutio,) which signifies the process of being enwrapped or en- 
 folded. 
 
 If the true meaning of the word Evolution be retained, when 
 we consider it in its relation to the development of the material 
 Universe, it is obvious that the word carries with it an implication 
 of the prior existence of that which is being evolved. In other 
 words, Evolution implies previous Involution, and the latter is the 
 measure of the former. Evolution cannot exceed Involution— that 
 which is not involved cannot be evolved. 
 
32 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 The process of Involution to Evolution is therefore an unfolding 
 of that which previously existed, but which was hidden from sight. 
 
 Evolution simplifies, for it lays bare and enables us to compre- 
 hend what was before involved or complicated. Thus we see that 
 the complex is the involved and the simple the evolved. 
 
 The passage, then, from the complex to the simple is what consti- 
 tutes Evolution. 
 
 This conclusion may cause a smile of incredulity in those who 
 have been in the habit of accepting without question the dictum 
 Mr. Spencer has laid down, that "the process of Evolution con- 
 sists in a change from the simple to the complex," or, to put it in 
 another way, "from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous.''* 
 
 A little thought is sufficient to show us that such a use of the 
 word Evolution is a gross perversion of the true significance of the 
 term. The process he describes is one of Involution, not one of 
 Evolution. According to his dictum, things are becoming more 
 and more involved or complicated. Surely, the proper name for 
 such a philosophy as this is that of Involution. 
 
 This confusion has arisen in Mr. Spencer's mind from the habit 
 of calling that which is complex simple, and designating, what is 
 simple complex. For example, Mr. Spencer would tell us that an 
 egg is simple as compared with the developed chick, which he 
 would designate as complex. But when we penetrate beneath the 
 surface of things, are we justified in calling the egg simple as 
 compared with the fully-developed chicken? The word simple 
 as applied to the egg is a shallow and common use of the word, 
 for it utterly ignores those hidden laws or tendencies through the 
 action of which the albuminous mass is converted into a bird, and 
 only refers to those superficial parts which can be determined and 
 comprehended by the senses. But when we penetrate beneath the 
 surface of things with the eye of reason — for here the microscope 
 and the scalpel avail us naught — we are compelled to regard the 
 fertilized egg as the most complicated of things. In the narrow 
 compass of its albuminous mass, we recognize the potential exist- 
 ence of the fully-developed chicken, with all the arteries, nerves, 
 
 * This definition is not new with Mr. Spencer, but was formulated by the 
 celebrated Von Baer. With him it was used merely as a morphological gen- 
 eralization of tangible things. In Mr. Spencer's hands, it becomes the basis 
 for a cosmogony. 
 
True Evolution Defined. 33 
 
 muscles, bones, and all the other organs which, enter into its make- 
 up. The numerous laws or tendencies* which stand in the place 
 of overseers to the atoms and molecules of this mass, render it far 
 more complex than the developed chick, for these laws or ten- 
 dencies are completely hidden from us and no analysis in our 
 power can make them apparent; but the warmth of the mother's 
 body soon begins to clear up the complex mass ; one after another 
 the organs make their appearance, and in a few weeks the trans- 
 formation is complete and we have a fully-developed chicken in 
 place of the yellow and. apparently, homogeneous mass we had 
 before. We understand now what we did not so much as guess 
 (supposing we had never seen nor heard of such a transformation) ; 
 Evolution has simplified the complex constitution of the egg, and 
 rendered apparent what was before completely buried out of sight. 
 The egg has literally been unfolded, and we now read without diffi- 
 culty where before a blank greeted us. If we take any one of the 
 numerous organs of whicli the developed chicken is composed and 
 analyze its constitution, we may justly wonder at the number of 
 parts which enter into its make-up, but how much more must be 
 our appreciation of the complex nature of the egg which compre- 
 hended it all. We must not confound this potential existence in 
 the egg of all the parts of the developed creature with the theory 
 of encasement or material existence of each individual organ on a 
 minute scale, as was held in the last century by Haller and others. 
 But the presence of the laws or tendencies render the egg even 
 more complex than if each organ had material existence on a 
 minute scale. 
 
 Let us then be careful and not confound true complexity with 
 that which only depends on qualities which are appreciable by the 
 senses. In the ovum all is so complex and involved that we know 
 nothing about it, or, as Mr. Spencer would put it, ''it is so simple 
 that it can be described in a line; " but in the fully-developed man 
 everything is revealed to us, simplified, laid out before us, so that 
 a volume may be written. 
 
 Mr. Spencer, and those who think with him, quietly ignore in 
 their definition of Evolution those laws through whose influence 
 
 * As it is certain that all these laws or tendencies are represented by pecu- 
 liarities of molecular structure, the complexity of the egg, even from the stand- 
 point of the materialist, is something beyond all conception. 
 3 
 
34 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 the dead matter of the Universe has been built up into the won- 
 drous edifice which we see around us. But let it be remembered 
 that the atoms are to the Universe what the bricks are to the house. 
 The bricks which lie promiscuously scattered around cannot aggre- 
 gate themselves into a house without the intervention of something 
 outside of them. The mind of man and his mechanical contriv- 
 ances stand in the relation of primal and secondary laws to these 
 dead bricks, and through the workings of these laws the bricks are 
 made to assume that relation towards one another which we call 
 a house. Now,' the bricks themselves remain exactly the same r 
 but their relations to one another are so entirely changed that 
 where before we had a scattered pile of bricks we now have a mag- 
 nificent temple, beautiful and symmetrical in all its parts. Now T 
 the true nature of the house does not reside in the individual bricks, 
 for they remain unchanged, but it exists in the foem which they 
 are made to fill up. The individual bricks, therefore, only sub- 
 serve the purpose of making apparent to the senses the FOEM or 
 idea which previously existed in the mind of the architect alone — 
 the house is the shadow of his mind projected upon matter — the 
 outlining of a pure ideal with dead matter. 
 
 Let us apply this great truth to the various foems which matter 
 takes in the material Universe. It will thus be seen that the sec- 
 ondary laws whose existence Mr. Spencer wholly ignores in his 
 definition of the simple are all important in the Universe, for it is 
 through their agency that the dead atoms are made to assume those 
 various relations which are apparent to our senses. It must be 
 remembered that the atoms themselves undergo no change, their 
 relations to one another are only altered. Further, it is obvious 
 that, as far as any change in the atoms themselves is concerned, 
 the Universe is the same now as it tvas in the beginning of things. 
 It may, therefore, be truly held that the Universe must have pre- 
 existed in foem or idea, which the atoms (like the bricks in a 
 house) make apparent to our senses. It is, therefore, obvious to 
 the most superficial understanding that the laws of nature consti- 
 tute the Universe as we conceive of it, and are therefore all im- 
 portant when we come to formulate what is simple and what is 
 complex. When Mr. Spencer defines the egg as simple, his defi- 
 nition utterly ignores the existence of those tendencies upon which 
 the real nature of the egg depends and which insure the building 
 

 Spencer s Definition of Evolution. 35 
 
 up of the animal structure. His definition can have no reference 
 to these laws, for. if it had, by what process of reasoning could he 
 arrive at the conclusion that the egg is simpler than the being 
 which it produces? The egg of a human being produces a human 
 being, the egg of a dog produces a dog, yet, in microscopic and 
 chemical characters, the two are so nearly alike that they cannot 
 be distinguished ! What inference are we to draw from this? The 
 complex constitution of each egg is simplified during the evolving 
 process — the laws governing each make themselves manifest by 
 compelling the atoms to assume certain relations — and in the one 
 case a man, in the other a dog, is the result. It is, therefore, evi- 
 dent that any definition of Evolution which ignores the existence 
 of these hidden tendencies, and which embodies such erroneous 
 ideas of the simple and the complex, is worthless. 
 
 Mr. Spencer formulates several definitions of Evolution — thus, 
 on page 360, First Principles, he says: "Evolution is definable as a 
 change from incoherent homogeneity to a coherent heterogeneity, ac- 
 companying the dissipation of motion and integration of matter." 
 On page 396 of the same work, he tells us that " Evolution is an 
 integration of matter and concomitant dissipation of motion; during 
 which the matter passes from an indefinite, incoherent homogeneity 
 to a definite, coherent heterogeneity ; and during which the retained 
 motion undergoes a parallel transformation. 1 '' He elsewhere formu- 
 lates it thus: " Evolution is a change from an indefinite, incoherent 
 homogeneity to a definite, coherent heterogeneity, through continuous 
 differentiations and integrations." 
 
 The key-note to all these various definitions is that Evolution 
 consists essentially in a change from a state of simplicity to a state 
 of complexity. This he renders clear in many passages through- 
 out his works. Here is a random quotation from " Progress, its 
 Law and Cause : " 
 
 " It is settled beyond dispute that organic progress consists in a 
 change from the homogeneous (simple) to the heterogeneous, (com- 
 plex.) Now, we propose to show that this law of organic progress 
 is the law of all progress. Whether it be in the development of 
 the earth, in the development of life upon its surface, in the devel- 
 opment of society, of government, of manufactures, of commerce, 
 of language, literature, science, art, this same evolution of the 
 
36 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 simple into the complex through successive differentiations holds 
 throughout." 
 
 Again, on page 362, F. P., he says: "At the same time that 
 Evolution is a change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous, 
 it is a change from the indefinite to the definite. Along with an 
 advance from simplicity to complexity, there is an advance from 
 confusion to order — from undetermined arrangement to deter- 
 mined arrangement." 
 
 Would Mr. Spencer have us believe that the egg of the animal 
 and the seed of the plant, with their wondrously complex and del- 
 icate molecular adjustments, are confused masses of undetermined 
 arrangements ? 
 
 These last passages leave us in no doubt as to what he means to 
 convey in his definition of Evolution if we were uncertain before. 
 While his definition is worthless as defining Evolution, it is a cor- 
 rect definition of Involution, for it embodies the idea which he 
 wishes to convey " that through all time there has been an ever- 
 growing complication of things," or, in other words, things are be- 
 coming more and more involved. Mr. Spencer himself recognizes 
 the inappropriateness of the word " Evolution " to express his sys- 
 tem of belief. He says, (First Principles, page 285-286,) "As 
 ordinarily understood, to evolve is to unfold, to open and expand, 
 to throw out, to emit; whereas, as we understand it, the act of 
 evolving, though it implies increase of a concrete aggregate, and 
 in so far an expansion of it, implies that its component matter has 
 passed from a more diffused to a more concentrated state — has 
 contracted. The antithetical word Involution would much more 
 truly express the nature of the process ; and would, indeed, describe 
 better the secondaiy characters of the process which we shall have 
 to deal with presently." He goes on to explain why he uses the 
 word Evolution instead of Involution, by saying that the word 
 Evolution "is now so widely recognized as signifying not, indeed, 
 the general process above described, but sundry of the most con- 
 spicuous varieties of it, and certain, of its secondary but most re- 
 markable accompaniments, that we cannot now substitute another 
 word." If Mr. Spencer insists on calling his system by a name 
 which expresses ideas diametrically opposite to what that system 
 teaches, thereby monopolizing a word which has been and still is 
 used to express a system of philosophy which is as widely sun- 
 
Involution. 37 
 
 dered from his as the two poles are from one another, he must not 
 be surprise!! if the charge of inconsistency be brought against him. 
 The absurdity of applying the term Evolution to a process which 
 leads to Involution or complexity is too apparent to require 
 further comment. We must, therefore, designate Mr Spencer's 
 philosophy by its proper name, and call it the doctrine of Invo- 
 lution. 
 
 By the light with which this word Involution floods his system, 
 we are enabled to penetrate the veil of sophistry in which it is en- 
 folded. Mr. Spencer uses the word Dissolution as antithetical to 
 Involution, and to express that state of things which preceded In- 
 volution. According to him, " Involution and Dissolution together 
 make up the entire process through which things pass, (First Prin- 
 ciples, p. 543.) On pages 536 and 537, he says : " Thus we are 
 led to the conclusion that the entire process of things, as displayed 
 in the aggregate of the visible Universe, is analogous to the entire 
 process of things as displayed in the smallest aggregates. Motion 
 as well as matter being fixed in quantity, it would seem that the 
 change in the distribution of matter which motion effects, coming 
 to a limit in whichever direction it is carried, the indestructible 
 motion thereupon necessitates a reverse distribution. Apparently, 
 the universally co-existent forces of attraction and repulsion, which, 
 ;is we have seen, necessitate rythm in all minor changes through- 
 out the Universe, also necessitate rythm in the totality of its 
 changes — produce now an immeasurable period during which the 
 attractive forces predominating cause universal concentration, and 
 then an immeasurable period during which the repulsive forces 
 predominating cause universal diffusion — alternate eras of Invo- 
 lution and Dissolution. And thus there is suggested the concep- 
 tion of a past during which there have been successive Involutions 
 analogous to that which is now going on, and a future during 
 which successive other Involutions may go on — ever the same in 
 principle, but never the same in concrete result," 
 
 Carrying out this thought, he says, page 551: "* * If we 
 are hence compelled to entertain the conception of Involutions 
 that have filled an immeasurable past and Involutions that will 
 fill an immeasurable future, we can no longer contemplate the 
 visible creation as having a definite beginning or end or as being 
 isolated. It becomes unified with all existence before and after." 
 
38 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 This system of thought, then, calls upon 
 us to contemplate the totality of existence 
 a's consisting of alternate states of Dissolu- 
 tion and Involution, and the cycle passed 
 through from the commencement of a period 
 of Involution to the completion of the sub-, 
 sequent period of Dissolution constitutes a 
 rythmic pulsation of the totality of being. 
 
 This notion may be diagramaticallv ex- 
 pressed by a cycloidal curve, in which the 
 larger loops correspond to his periods of In- 
 volution and the smaller ones to his periods 
 of Dissolution. 
 
 C ^j o P f R 'd°ssoIutwn The rea der Wli l observe that these succes- 
 
 sive states of Involution and Dissolution are 
 alternately cause and effect for one another. 
 Nor can one be given precedence over the 
 other, either in past existence or in future 
 existence; both alike extend to an infinite 
 past and both will succeed one another to an 
 infinite future. In point of dignity in the 
 scale of being, there can be no distinction be- 
 tween them, for both are co-equal and co- 
 eternal. His belief in the uncaused nature 
 of matter and denial of a definite beginning 
 to the visible Universe,* and his statement 
 that we are not to look upon it as isolated 
 (in the sense of being different) from the ulti- 
 mate power, but, as identified with it, leaves 
 him but one thing to do, and that is to regard 
 m the visible Universe as this ultimate power 
 
 h itself. His system is, therefore, pantheistical, 
 
 S and the successive periods he describes under 
 
 the names of Involution and Dissolution are merely varying modes 
 of the one being — the rythmic pulsations of his Universe GrOD. 
 
 * Mr. Spencer says (P. Biology) : " The creation of matter is inconceivable — 
 implies a relation between something and nothing, an impossible relation." He 
 uses the word inconceivable in the sense of incredible, as is apparent from the 
 context. 
 
 PRESENT STATE 
 OF INVOLUTION 
 
 FUTURE STATE 
 OF DISSOLUTION 
 
Involution. 39 
 
 It is now a legitimate scientific conclusion that the material 
 Universe does undergo alternating phases of dissolution and re- 
 construction. But when Mr. Spencer makes ALL existence pass 
 through these states, his great error is at once apparent. This notion 
 of the perpetual loaning and waxing of tilings is not new, and is 
 embodied in that saying, common with some of the old Greeks, 
 that " Generation is in quality a change; " or, as Heraclitus affirmed, 
 "All existence is in a perpetual flux and reflux." And Empedocles, 
 in his poem on the nature of things, asserted of the material Uni- 
 verse that " there is a periodical generation and dissolution of 
 things/' ;is is evident from the following lines, translated by Taylor: 
 
 '•For now, from many, one alone increased, 
 And then the many from the one arose, 
 And mortals were assign'd their birth and their decay. 
 For this, the congress of the whole of things 
 Led forth to light, and, when produc'd, destroyed. 
 And this, when forms have into light emerg'd, 
 Again divides them into parts minute, 
 And gathers them again. These two, throughout 
 Diversified, are doom'd to endless change. 
 All things in union now thro' love conspire, 
 And now, thro' strife divuls'd, are borne along. 
 Hence, when again emerging into light 
 The one is seen, 'tis from the many form'd." * 
 
 Notwithstanding the fact that his system is pantheistical, Mr. 
 Spencer still seems to recognize a First Cause, which is a contra- 
 diction in terms, unless we accept the absurdity that a tiling can 
 cause itself. Moreover, a Pantheist cannot consistently recognize 
 such things as •'Fundamental Realities," "Ultimate Powers," and 
 the like, for to him every pari of the Universe is as fundamental 
 and as ultimate as every other. 
 
 As a Pantheist, Mr. Spencer is inconsistent, and to Monotheism 
 his system is absolutely antagonistic. In " First Principles," (p. 
 552, s. 192,) we read : " Towards some result of this order, (the 
 unification of all existence,) inquiry, scientific, metaphysical, and 
 theological, has been, and still is, manifestly advancing. The coal- 
 escence of polytheistic conceptions into the monotheistic concep- 
 
 * Empedocles of Agrigentum, (504-443 B. C.,) one of the most celebrated 
 physicians of antiquity and a disciple of Pythagoras. His wonderful cures 
 caused him to he considered the confidant of the srods. 
 
40 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 tion, and the reduction of the monotheistic conception to a more 
 and more general form in which personal superintendence becomes 
 merged in universal immanence, clearly shows this advance. It is 
 equally shown in the fading away of old theories about 'essences,' 
 1 potentialities,' * * ' Preestablished Harmonies,' and the like ; 
 and in the tendency towards the identification of Being as present 
 to us in consciousness (the I,) with Being as otherwise conditioned 
 beyond consciousness." The drift of all this is unmistakable. The 
 expression " universal immanence''' is put so glaringly in opposition 
 to " Monotheism " as to render all misconception as to his true 
 meaning impossible. Were it not for this, and for passages already 
 quoted, the expression might be interpreted as conveying the same 
 ideas as the phrase "Omnipresence and Omniscience of the Deity," 
 so commonly used by those who believe in a Creator. It is not 
 surprising that a very distinguished English writer characterized 
 Mr. Spencers system as having "the incurable defect of funda- 
 mental incoherence." To reconcile his inconsistencies would, in- 
 deed, be a task, compared with which the twelve labors of Her- 
 cules are mere child's play. 
 
 Thus he tells us {Progress: its Law and Cause) that "univers- 
 ally the effect is more complex than the cause." The inevitable con- 
 clusion which flows from this statement is that the First Cause of 
 the Universe is simpler and lower in the scale of being than the 
 thing to which it gave existence! ! ! 
 
 The Universe, having its cause in an infinite simplicity, is to 
 continue on to a never-ending complexity ; for he seems to think 
 that every succeeding period of involution will be more complex 
 than its predecessor. According to this view of things, what be- 
 comes of the favorite tenet of this school of thought, embodied in 
 the words " Ex nihilo nihil fit?" The doctrine starts with the ut- 
 most simplicity and ends in an infinite complexity ; it, therefore, 
 pre-supposes a constant coming into being independent of causation, 
 for the cause it postulates is, by its own statement, inadequate to 
 bring about the effect. 
 
 It is patent to the most superficial understanding that a cause 
 cannot give rise to anything superior to itself— what is not involved 
 in the cause cannot be evolved in the effect. 
 
 The absurdity into which Mr. Spencer's reasoning led him is a 
 good illustration of how a man may become the slave of a train of 
 
Criticisms. 41 
 
 thought; instead of guiding and controlling it, it gets the upper 
 hand, and leading on, from sophistry to sophistry, finally ends in 
 the most palpable absurdities. Those who wish to follow the train 
 of argument by which Mr. Spencer arrives at the conclusion that 
 effect is more complicated than cause, can do so by reading his 
 exposition on " Progress : its Law and Cause." He is there led into 
 the error of mistaking pari of a cause for a whole cause, and rea- 
 soning accordingly- After citing what he calls the law of all pro- 
 gress, which is essentially the first law stated a few pages back, and 
 which he formulates thus : "Every active force produces more than 
 one change — every cause produces more than one effect," he proceeds 
 to illustrate its working by the following, as well as by other ex- 
 amples : " Take, again, the lighting of a candle. Primarily, this is 
 a chemical change consequent on a rise of temperature. The pro- 
 cess of combination having once been set going by extraneous heat, 
 there is a continued formation of carbonic acid, water, etc., in itself 
 a result more complex than the extraneous heat that first caused 
 it. But, accompanying this process of combination, there is a pro- 
 duction of heat; there is a production of light; there is an ascend- 
 ing column of hot gases generated ; there are currents established 
 in the surrounding air. Moreover, the decomposition of one force 
 into many forces does not end here : each of the several changes 
 produced becomes the parent of further changes. The carbonic- 
 acid given off will by and by combine with some base ; or, under 
 the influence of sunshine, give up its carbon to the leaf of a plant. 
 The water will modify the hygometric state of the air around ; or, 
 if the current of hot gases containing it come against a cold body, 
 will be condensed : altering the temperature, and perhaps the chem- 
 ical state, of the surface it covers. The heat given out melts the 
 subjacent tallow, and expands whatever it warms. The light, fall- 
 ing on various substances, calls forth from them reactions by which 
 it is modified ; and so divers colors are produced. Similarly, even 
 with these secondary actions, which may be traced out into ever* 
 multiplying ramifications, until they become too minute to be ap- 
 preciated. And thus it is with all changes whatever. No case 
 can be named in which an active force does not evolve forces of 
 several kinds, and each of these, other groups of forces. Univer- 
 sally the effect is more complex than the cause. Doubtless the reader 
 already foresees the course of the argument. This multiplication 
 
42 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 of results, which is displayed in every event of to-day, has been 
 going on from the beginning ; and is true of the grandest phenom- 
 ena of the Universe as of the most insignificant. From the law 
 that every active force produces more than one change, it is an in- 
 evitable corollary that through all time there has been an ever- 
 growing complication of things." 
 
 It will be seen that the error into which Mr. Spencer has fallen 
 is the result of a narrow conception of what constitutes causation- 
 In recognizing the first law of progress, he ignores the second, 
 which is : Every effect is the result of more than one train of cause 
 and effect. Is it true, as he tells us, that the single act of lighting 
 a candle is the cause of the many effects which he details? A 
 little thought will show the fallacy of this statement. The truth 
 is that every effect mentioned is the result of numerous other causes, 
 each one as potent as every other in bringing about the final effect. 
 Thus, the formation of carbonic acid, water, etc., which followed 
 the consumption of the candle, could not have resulted had not 
 certain chemical laws existed which permitted of such a transform- 
 ation. Nor could the carbonic acid so formed have united with a 
 base had it not been for its affinity for that particular base, and for 
 its presence in the vicinity. Nor could it have given up its carbon 
 to the leaf of a particular plant, had it not been for the multitu- 
 dinous chain of causes, of a physical and vital nature, far too in- 
 tricate and obscure to trace. It is, therefore, obvious that the cause 
 which led to the lodgment of a carbon particle belonging to the 
 burning candle in the leaf of a particular plant is a most compli- 
 cated cause, consisting of many causes, all independent, but which 
 have inosculated, or run into, one another in the production of 
 the final effect. This may be better understood by the folio wing- 
 diagram, where the burning candle, one 
 of the factors of the compound cause 
 which led to the lodgment of the car- 
 bon particle in the leaf, is represented 
 by the twig A. The other twigs rep- 
 resent the other numerous and obscure 
 factors whose existence was necessary to the final result, B. 
 
 Had not Arietta's pretty feet, twinkling in the brook, fascinated 
 Count Robert, the Devil, William the Conqueror would not have 
 been born; the battle of Hastings would not have been fought; 
 
Criticisms. 43 
 
 no Anglo-Norman dynasty would have reigned, and England of 
 to-day would be very different from what it is ; ergo, the cause of 
 England's present greatness is to be attributed to Arietta's pretty 
 feet twinkling in a Norman brook, on a summer's day, some eight 
 hundred years ago. While it is undeniable that Arietta's pretty 
 feet are very important factors "of the very complicated cause of 
 England's present greatness, yet I hardly believe that any man who 
 prized his reputation as a thinker would hazard the assertion that 
 England's present greatness is due to Arietta's pretty feet. How 
 many antecedent, contemporaneous, and subsequent events, all as 
 potent, and all entirely independent of Arietta's pretty feet, have 
 conduced to the grand result? Who would have the hardihood 
 to attempt to trace the cause of England's present greatness ? This 
 illustration, comical though it be. is, in all respects, similar to the 
 preceding, and teaches on an exaggerated scale what it does on a 
 smaller. If Mr. Spencer should still insist that the burning candle 
 is the cause of the carbon particle being in the leaf, then, with equal 
 reason, he must hold that to Arietta's pretty feet must be attributed 
 the present greatness of the British Empire. 
 
 So far from Mr. Spencer's statement being true, "that universally 
 effect is more complicated than cause," the converse is universally 
 true. What is not involved in the cause cannot be evolved in the 
 effect, is an axiom as well grounded as any in geometrical science. 
 Even he who rejects belief in a Divine Being, the Author of the 
 Universe, is compelled to accept this as truth. From the point of 
 view of the atheist or pantheist. All Being, being an uncaused 
 existence, must be looked upon as a sequence of events, standing 
 in the relation of cause and effect, extending back into a beginning- 
 less past, and stretching out into a never-ending future. Every 
 effect, at the moment of its birth, becomes itself the cause of other 
 effects; and thus every event that occurs in the Universe is alter- 
 nately effect and cause. Considered as an effect, every event is the 
 apex of a pyramid of causes and effects which has a base of infinite 
 dimensions laid upon an eternal past ; considered as a cause, it is 
 the apex of a pyramid whose basal lines broaden with its progress 
 into futurity ; but infinite futurity being unattainable, the base of 
 the latter can never equal in dimensions the base of the former. 
 Now, what is true of any single event is true of all events whatso- 
 ever ; is, in a word, true of the whole Universe at any point of its 
 
44 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 duration. It, therefore, necessarily follows that the period of du- 
 ration which the Universe has already fulfilled can never, by any 
 possibility, be equaled in the future, endless though that be. In 
 other words, to the pantheist, the past history of the Universe is 
 greater than its future history can possibly be, and this is suscep- 
 tible of mathematical demonstration. Let the line' A C represent 
 
 duration, without beginning and without end. Let P, being the 
 present, represent any point on this line. Now the line A P, which 
 represents the past duration of the Universe, is endless in the direc- 
 tion of A ; but the line P C, which represents endless future du- 
 ration, can never be passed over, for the point C nowhere exists, 
 and, therefore, can never be reached. The past has come up to us 
 from the infinite, but the' future can never attain to the infinite. 
 The mathematician disposed to split mathematical hairs might 
 affirm that it could be reached in an infinite time, but, manifestly, 
 infinite future time can never be .realized. The future, therefore, 
 regarded as an effect of the past, can never equal this past in the 
 number of its events ; in other words, its complexity. Thus we 
 see that Mr. Spencers statement, even when examined from the 
 stand-point of the pantheist, is without any foundation in fact. 
 
 Furthermore, from what has preceded, it necessarily follows that 
 the Universe is to be looked upon by the pantheist merely as a 
 mass of matter and force, flowing along the line of infinite dura- 
 tion. As it is now a well-established law of the physical world 
 that matter is indestructible, and that the original store of force 
 cannot be added to, it results that, if this mass be examined at 
 any point of its course along the line of endless duration, it will be 
 found to consist of precisely the same number of atoms, moved by 
 precisely the same forces, acting in precisely the same way, induc- 
 ing the same adjustments, and, therefore, manifesting the same de- 
 gree of complexity. In other words, the Universe of ten millions 
 of years back was of the same complexity as that of the present ; 
 and the Universe of ten millions of years hence will show no in- 
 crease of complexity. For, were it otherwise, did this mass of 
 atoms and force present degrees of complication at every point of 
 its march along the line of duration, it would argue the coming 
 
Criticisms. 45 
 
 into being of something new at every step of the way, bringing 
 about this perpetual change and increasing complexity. But the 
 pantheist caunot consistently recognize the coming into being of 
 any such new comers. Thus the constant change which we see 
 taking place in the Universe around us is, itself, a refutation of 
 pantheism. " To subsist always according to the same, and in a 
 similar manner, and to be the same, belongs to the most divine of 
 all things alone. But the nature of body is not of this order." * 
 
 According to this system, then, the Universe is becoming more 
 and more complex, more and more involved. It is not surprising, 
 therefore, that many of those who accept this philosophy should 
 look to man as the most exalted being in the Universe, the noblest 
 aggregation of atoms, and should render unto him that homage due 
 his exalted position. Comte recognized this, and Professor Clifford 
 also seems to enter into the true spirit of this philosophy when he 
 speaks of " Father man looking out from the dim dawn of history, 
 with the fire of eternal youth in his eye, crying out, before Jehovah 
 was, I am." In spite of the "dirt philosoph} 7 " which they advo- 
 cate, it has not been powerful enough to destroy all sentiment in 
 their bosoms, and the better part of their nature tries to assert itself. 
 
 The Universe must be looked upon either as the Uncaused Be- 
 ing itself, or as the expression of the WILL of this Uncaused Being. 
 From this there is no escape. Enough has been said to show that 
 Mr. Spencer's theory of Involution caunot be accepted by any one 
 who believes in the existence of an Uncaused Being distinct from 
 the Universe, that is, a Creator. 
 
 But the doctrine of true Evolution teaches that all things are 
 suspended from such a Being, and that the Universe around us is 
 the embodiment of His will. The atoms of matter which He 
 created He also endowed with the laws which have compelled them 
 to assume those numerous relations which we call the Material 
 Universe. 
 
 In assuming these relations, the atoms reveal to us the Laws 
 which govern them, and this is what Evolution consists in. The 
 writer would, therefore, suggest the following as a definition of 
 Evolution : It is a change feom the complex to the simple — 
 
 A PROGRESSIVE UNFOLDING OF CAUSE INTO EFFECT. This scien- 
 * Plato, in the " Statesman." 
 
46 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 tific definition naturally merges into the transcendental definition 
 that Evolution is the unfolding of the will of the Uncaused Being. 
 
 It is obvious that the process only becomes possible in the Ma- 
 terial Universe when there are Supeeimposed laws to be made 
 manifest. Mr. Spencer's theories will be found wanting whether 
 we test them from the stand-point of Theism or from the stand- 
 point of Pantheism. . 
 
 Theism asserts that there is an Uncaused' Being, not the Uni- 
 verse, but the Author of it ; Pantheism holds that the Universe 
 is itself the Uncaused Being. 
 
 By the first hypothesis, the Universe, being a caused thing, must 
 have had a beginning. 
 
 Let A represent the Fiat of the Uncaused Being to whom the 
 p Universe owes its existence, and let 
 the lines B B, C C, D B, E E, F F, 
 represent the Universe at various 
 points of duration and degrees of 
 development, with its ever-increasing 
 multitude of events. Then A is the 
 cause of B B, B B the cause of G C, 
 C Cthe cause of DD, and so on until 
 the present state of things was 
 evolved. The First Cause, J., is the most complex of all the 
 causes in this chain, for it enfolds all the others, and they are de- 
 pendent upon it for existence. B B, which is the effect of A and 
 the cause of G C, is less complex than A, and more complex than 
 C G; and when we reach F F, the whole chain is evolved and sim- 
 plified. Now, the difference between the cloctrince of Evolution 
 and the doctrine of Involution, held by Mr. Spencer and those 
 who think with him, is just this: They hold that A is simpler 
 than B B, and that B B is simpler than G C, and so on down the 
 chain. They postulate an ever-increasing involvement, or compli- 
 cation of things, but their Causative Power diminishes as they re- 
 cede from final effects and approach the Primal Cause. They re- 
 cognize the existence of the tree of nature, with all its great and 
 wide-spreading branches, but they deny it the soil from which it 
 derives the nourishment which insures its growth and perpetuation. 
 It is obvious that Mr. Spencer's position is absurd on the hy- 
 pothesis of a Primal Cause distinct from the Universe. By the 
 
Criticisms. 47 
 
 second hypothesis, which asserts that the Universe is itself the 
 Uncaused Being, the absurdity of his position is rendered, if pos- 
 sible, still more glaring. For the line F F, with its atoms and 
 forces having always existed, it becomes obvious that it cannot 
 have varied either in simplicity or complexity, but has remained 
 always the same. Neither progress nor retrogression can be pos- 
 tulated of an uncaused thing. 
 
 Such are the monstrous errors of that system of philosophy 
 which teaches that it is impossible for the mind to arrive at a 
 knowledge of the existence of a Supreme Uncaused Being, w r ho 
 is not the Universe, but the author of it. 
 
 Blinded, indeed, must be the eye that fails to see that, as we re- 
 cede from Primal Cause, in the study of nature, things become 
 simpler and more easily comprehended ; but, as we approach 
 Primal Cause, they become more and more complex, until we ar- 
 rive at the Infinite Complexity of the Infinite God. And this 
 enables us to appreciate that statement of Aristotle, at the very 
 commencement of his " Physics," where he tells us that the natural 
 path for the mind to pursue in the study of Nature is " from things 
 more known and manifest to us," (things furthest removed from 
 primal cause,) "to things that are more known and manifest to 
 nature," (tilings that are nearer to primal cause.) 
 
 And this is the process known by the name of Experimental 
 or Inductive philosophy ; for it proceeds from the simple effect to 
 the more complicated cause, and the mind is thus led by progres- 
 sive steps from the known to that which is hidden. The Agnostic, 
 making a fallacious use of this great truth, which obtains in the 
 study of natural phenomena, takes the stand that, inasmuch as it 
 is impossible to attain to an exhaustive knowledge of natural pro- 
 cesses, or, in other words, to master the whole chain of effect and 
 cause from F F up to A, it is, therefore, absurd and unphiloso- 
 phical to make this First Cause an object of contemplation, for its 
 real nature is forever hidden from us. 
 
 According to this teaching, we must analyze exhaustively the 
 whole Universe — we must literally become gods — ere we need 
 trouble our heads even as to the existence, much less the nature, of 
 this First Cause. Mr. Huxley has well expressed this sentiment 
 in his " Physical Basis of Life," when he sa} T s : " If a man asks 
 me what the politics of the inhabitants of the moon are, and I re- 
 
48 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 ply that I do not know ; that neither I, nor any one else, have any 
 means of knowing ; and that, under these circumstances, I decline 
 to trouble myself about the subject at all, I do not think he has 
 any right to call me a sceptic." A little further on, he makes this 
 sentiment still more emphatic: "Permit me to enforce this most 
 wise advice : Why trouble ourselves about matters of which, how- 
 ever important they may be, we do know nothing, and can know 
 nothing." Such is the stand taken by these thinkers in relation 
 to the First Cause .of all things. 
 
 Whilst it is undeniably true that it is impossible for the human 
 mind to grasp the Infinite, and comprehend in all its entirety the 
 great First Cause, yet there is a method of approaching this great 
 question which enables us to arch across the dead matter of the 
 Universe, and bring ourselves in direct relation with the First 
 Cause. The telescope, the microscope, the crucible, and the scalpel 
 are here of no avail, and we are compelled to rely upon that think- 
 ing something within us which we call intelligence. 
 
 When we contemplate ourselves as belonging to that chain of 
 cause and effect to which the other phenomena of the Universe 
 belong, (and to this every Atheist is compelled to give his assent,) 
 we are justified in concluding that we are, as far as the globe is 
 concerned, the most exalted aggregation of atoms that the Evolving 
 process, set on foot by the First Cause, has brought forth. 
 
 Now, according to the doctrine of Efficient Causes, the First 
 Cause could not produce anything Superior to, or Higher in the 
 scale of Being, than itself. This, of course, is a necessary conclu- 
 sion if we postulate a First Cause at all. It necessarily follows 
 from this, that Man is Inferior to this First Cause to which he owes 
 his existence. The human mind, then, when it allows itself to 
 contemplate the First Cause, must regard it as something superior, 
 and this superiority is absolute, embracing every conceivable con- 
 ception of the word. 
 
 Now, what is the natural attitude of the mind when it contem- 
 plates extraordinary superiority in a kindred mind ? Do we not re- 
 gard such superiority with respect and consideration, which increase 
 in proportion to the worth of the object ? Now, inasmuch as this 
 First Cause is infinitely our superior in every conceivable way, we 
 are bound by the laws of reason to contemplate it with all the re- 
 spect and consideration of which our nature is capable. When 
 
Agnosticism. 49 
 
 these feelings are carried to the limits of our powers they are de- 
 nominated reverence and worship. Hence, the natural outcome of 
 an acknowledgment that the First Cause is, in every way, infinitely 
 superior to ourself, is a drawing forth of all those feelings which 
 constitute worship. When the mind has once firmly planted itself 
 u] ton this eternal rock, it may lie truly held that it has attained to 
 a knowledge of the First Great Cause. One of the broad distinc- 
 tions between the Atheist and the Theist lies in this all-important 
 mental attitude toward the First Cause. In the mind of the 
 Atheist, the First Cause is regarded of so little importance that, 
 according to Mr. Huxley, il it is waste of time to trouble our heads 
 about it." Such a mind fails to realize the infinite superiority of 
 the Cause which brought it into existence, or it would not with- 
 hold those feelings which are the legitimate offspring of such a 
 realization. But, in the mind of the Theist, the First Cause is an 
 object of reverential contemplation, and is regarded as infinitely 
 transeendingeven the most exalted conception of which the human 
 mind is capable. Mr. Spencer is constantly criticising the concep- 
 tion of this First Cause, as held by the noblest minds of the day. 
 A long Greek word, anthropomorphism, (anthropos, man, and 
 morphe, form, i has been used in a spirit of detraction to designate 
 the current conception of the Supreme Cause. But what would 
 these gentlemen have? We are not gods, that we can have a god- 
 I ike conception of this Great Being ! But are we justified in making- 
 no attempt simply because our limited faculties are unable to do 
 the theme justice? Must we grovel because we cannot reach the 
 sun? The wings of the eagle were given it to soar, not to crawl ! 
 Now, I hold that the human mind is so constituted by its Great 
 Artificer that, when any idea is presented to it. some conception 
 must rise in the mind regarding it. When, therefore, the notion 
 of causation is presented to us. the conception of power to produce 
 or to bring forth something at once springs up in the mind; and 
 our appreciation of this Cause is proportionate to our conception 
 of its power to produce. When we postulate a First Cause of the 
 Universe, the mind recoils upon itself, confounded at the magnitude 
 of the power which this asserts, and reason tells us that, however 
 elevated our conception may be, it will fall infinitely short of the 
 Great Reality. Now, in forming this conception, we have choice 
 of one of two guides : we must either interrogate what we coll our 
 4 
 
50 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 higher nature, or we must sink to what we call our lower nature ; our 
 conception will either be higher than ourselves, or it will be lower. 
 Now, by universal consent, the thinking faculty w T ithin us, and, 
 which we denominate intelligence, (whether that intelligence be 
 merely the result of a peculiar aggregation of atoms, as held by 
 the Materialist ; or whether it is spiritual, that is, without body,) is the 
 noblest part about us. Through its assistance, we have arrived at 
 the conclusion that man is higher in the scale of being than the 
 brutes of the field, higher than the birds of the air, higher than 
 any aggregation of atoms whatsoever. Old Mother Earth is spurned 
 by her latest ungrateful offspring, who regards her as nothing more 
 than a clod of earth, on a large scale, rolling -around another and 
 larger lump of the same material on fire. The eye and the tele- 
 scope reveal to us countless thousands of these flaming masses 
 whirling through the depths of space. Yet the little "two-legged 
 creature, without feathers," called man, stands unabashed before 
 all this pomp and grandeur, and, looking in upon himself, says, 
 with the utmost complacency : " I am their superior ;" and he 
 seems to make good his boast, for he weighs them in balances, pre- 
 dicts their comings and goings, and discovers the invisible threads 
 which bind them one to the other. The speed of the agile mes- 
 senger, light, he has measured, and the penetrating power of his 
 eye he has so multiplied that he can see a star from which it takes 
 light thousands of years to come. Such are some of the exploits 
 of this peculiar aggregation of atoms, called man, in the domain 
 of the vast. His performances in the little world are no less won- 
 derful. 
 
 Taking all these great powers into consideration, man is certainly 
 justified in regarding himself the most exalted aggregation of atoms 
 of which he knows anything, from his own experience. But he 
 knows (that is, if he recognizes no other Substance but atoms) that 
 there must be an aggregation of atoms somewhere in the Universe 
 infinitely his Superior — that there must be an aggregation of atoms 
 which possesses Something Higher than what he calls Intelligence. 
 It must also possess Something Higher and Nobler than what he 
 Galls his Moral faculties. These are necessary conclusions from 
 the postulate that the aggregation of atoms called the First Cause 
 is absolutely his Superior in every conceivable way. The con- 
 sciousness of Self-existence, which man regards among the noblest of 
 
Conceptions of the Uncaused Being. 51 
 
 his attributes, lie must ascribe, also, to the First Cause aggregation 
 of atoms, or, if not exactly what he calls consciousness, Something 
 vastly Higher than this. 
 
 Such a conception as this would be properly termed a material- 
 istic one of the Ultimate nature of the First Cause ; but it would 
 not necessarily be a Pantheistic conception, that is to say, it would 
 not, necessarily carry with it the idea that all the atoms in the 
 Universe were concerned in the formation of this First Cause. 
 The weakness of such a conception as this could be demonstrated 
 by a child. It postulates uncaused existence, but it limits the 
 First Cause in Body, and, therefore, in power ; it makes It act as 
 a whole, but it affirms that It is divisible into parts, being composed 
 of individual atoms. The conception is a gross absurdity, and in- 
 volves flat contradictions. We must, therefore, in framing a ma- 
 terialistic conception, put no limit to the number of atoms which 
 compose the First Cause. But if we put no limit to the number 
 of atoms which go to make up the First Cause, it is evident that 
 It must embrace all the atoms in the Universe ; and we ourselves , 
 the food we eat, the water we drink, the earth we tread upon, and 
 all the stars of heaven, enter into the composition of this Being. 
 
 This conception is, if possible, more absurd than the first. The 
 whole material universe being identified with the First Cause, this 
 would destroy the First Cause as a Cause, unless we accepted the 
 absurdity that a thing can cause itself. The conclusion, therefore, 
 annihilates the postulate with which we started — that of a First 
 Cause. Moreover, although we make It embrace all the atoms in 
 the Universe, yet we limit Its magnitude, for the number of bodies 
 occupying space cannot be Absolutely Infinite. If they were, 
 there would be no void /Space in the whole Universe, and it would 
 be Solid throughout. No motion could exist, for there would be 
 no room for the atoms to move in. 
 
 The validity of this latter argument against the Materiality of 
 the Supreme Being, advanced by Aristotle to refute the Material- 
 ists of his time, receives fresh support from the researches of Mod- 
 ern Science. 
 
 We know (if we know anything) that a cubic foot, say of iron, 
 contains a greater mass or quantity of matter, (and, therefore, a 
 great number of atoms, if we assume their sameness,) than a cubic 
 foot of water or air ; we know that a cubic foot of space from which 
 
52 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 the air has been removed, contains a less number of atoms than 
 the original space before the removal of the air. If we do not 
 know these things, then we know nothing, and science is impossible. 
 It becomes obvious, therefore, that there are not as many atoms in 
 Existence as there might be. But if we can conceive that there 
 might be a greater number of atoms than there are, then the mass 
 of matter, or number of atoms, in the Universe does not fill our 
 definition of the absolutely Infinite, for it is not of such a magni- 
 tude that we cannot conceive a greater. In a word, were the Su- 
 preme Being composed of what ive call matter, no VOID Space could 
 exist, nor, indeed, could such things as atoms exist; and w r hat we 
 now call Infinite Space would be an Infinite Absolute Solid, a 
 solid of such a nature as we now conceive the atom to be. 
 
 Furthermore, the postulate of uncaused existence absolutely ex- 
 cludes the idea of any change taking place in Its own nature ; com- 
 plete perfection from all Eternity is a necessary inference from such 
 an assumption. Nor would it be possible for this First Cause to 
 worship itself, which it would be doing through the Medium of 
 those parts of its make-up called human beings. No conception 
 of the First Cause could be more absurd than this ; and it is un- 
 worthy of further thought. It is evident, therefore, that the Great 
 First Cause cannot be in its ultimate nature what we call matter ; 
 but if it is not matter, It must be something else. Now, that 
 which is not what we call matter is denominated Immaterial, or 
 spirit ; but this comprehensive word may embrace more than one 
 kind of Substance; it, therefore, throws no light on the ultimate 
 nature of the First Cause, except to tell us that It is not body, 
 for body occupies space, and such a substance is what we call mat- 
 ter. And thus, by a process of exclusion, we arrive at the con- 
 ception of Something which is not matter, and we embrace this 
 something which is not matter under the the general term Spirit, 
 and when we call the First Cause of things a Spirit, we simply 
 affirm that it is not what we call matter. We found this substance 
 we call matter inadequate to embody a sufficiently exalted concep- 
 tion of the First Cause, for it Conditioned the Unconditioned — it 
 Limited the Infinite. We are, therefore, not only justified, but 
 we are compelled by all the laws of thought to designate the Great 
 First Cause a Spirit, always keeping in mind that this word only 
 defines what It is Not, not what it is. It is also evident that the 
 
Conceptions of (he Uncaused Being. 53 
 
 substance we call matter cannot in any way enter into the ultimate 
 nature of the First Cause, for this would be making the Infinite 
 depend upon the Finite for Existence. We are thus forced to the 
 conclusion that matter has no place in the essence of the Great 
 First Cause; being free from all admixture with what we call mat- 
 ter, It receives the designation of Pure Spirit This Pure Spirit, 
 the Cause of all things that exist, being the author of our being, 
 and Infinitely Superior to us, commands the most exalted venera- 
 tion and reverence of which our limited nature is capable. Now, 
 there can be no contemplation if there is no conception of the ob- 
 ject contemplated. It is, therefore, an absolute necessity for the 
 mind, in order to contemplate the First Cause, that it should form 
 some conception of its nature. In forming this necessary concep- 
 tion, it is plainly the duty of the mind to draw it from the most 
 exalted source of which it knows anything. 
 
 Now, there is something in man called Intelligence, and, accord- 
 ing to his estimate, this is the highest part about him, and, as he 
 reckons himself the most exalted thing on the Earth, this principle 
 must be the noblest thing he is acquainted with. In ascribing 
 this Intelligence to the Great First Cause, he is doing all in his 
 power; if he could conceive of anything higher than Intelligence, 
 he would be in duty bound to confer it upon this First Cause. 
 Again, we use a word Good in our vocabulary, and when we 
 wish to describe a man as particularly noble and worthy of ven- 
 eration, we term him a Good Man. In applying this word to the 
 First Cause, we are simply describing it by the most exalted word 
 our vocabulary furnishes. The word, as applied to man's actions, 
 always implies the possibility of its correlative Evil; but when 
 used to characterize the Supreme Being, it is shorn of its opposite 
 and termed Infinite or absolute good. If we had a grander word, 
 which possessed no shadow, we would be in duty bound to use it 
 in referring to the First Cause. Again, we have a word Wise, 
 which we apply to acts particularly adapted to meet pre-conceived 
 ends. We, therefore, make use of this word, as the most expres- 
 sive we possess, to show our appreciation of the act, acts, or pro- 
 cess by which the Universe was brought into existence. This 
 word, as applied to man's acts, implies its correlative Folly ; but, 
 as was done with the word Good, this opposite is purged away 
 
54 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 when the word is used to describe the acts of the Supreme One, 
 and we speak of such acts as being Infinitely or absolutely wise. 
 
 And thus we arrive at the apprehension (not comprehension) of 
 the existence of an Infinitely Good, an Infinitely Wise, and an 
 Infinitely Intelligent Spiritual (i. e., non-material) Being. Whilst 
 Mr. Spencer strenuously opposes the ascription of any attributes 
 to the First Cause, and charges Sir W. Hamilton and Mr. Mansel 
 with inconsistency for so doing, yet he does ' the same thing him- 
 self when he speaks of the First Cause as a Force or Power. What 
 is there about this word Force which elevates it above all others 
 as a cognomen of the First Cause of things? Like the others, it 
 possesses a correlative which the word Impotence expresses; but, 
 unlike the others, it. is a word which is not consecrated by its 
 usage, for it is applied to the most trivial manifestations of the 
 material world. I cannot lift my hand without exercising what 
 is known as Force. The animal walks, the bird flies, the fish 
 swims by Force. There is nothing in the word itself which calls 
 up notions of the highest excellence. On the contrary, it is in- 
 separably associated with the most commonplace events of every- 
 day life. Furthermore, this word Force, our conceptions of which 
 are drawn from what we see in nature, calls up in the mind the 
 idea of an inexorable power working through necessity, not a spon- 
 taneous and feee agent unfettered by all limitations. This con- 
 sideration would of itself unfit the word as a cognomen of the 
 Great First Cause. Why, then, should Mr. Spencer select this 
 word as the distinguishing title of the First Cause instead of the 
 word God whic'h man has coined from the noblest word which 
 language possesses, and which worship has set apart and conse- 
 crated? Throughout the length and breadth of his philosophy, 
 this word, which concentrates within itself the most exalted con- 
 ceptions of the human mind, receives not a sign of recognition 
 from this wise man of the nineteenth century. We hear much of 
 Universal Forces, Persistent Forces, Ultimate Powers, Unknowables. 
 Mr. Spencer insists on taking his symbols from his Lower nature 
 rather than from his Higher. This, to say the least, is inconsistent; 
 still this is nothing unusual with Mr. Spencer. Consistently he 
 cannot recognize a First Cause at all, for he identifies his Ultimate 
 Power with the Universe ; the Universe would thus become a 
 First Cause, which is absurd. 
 
Creation by Involution and Instantaneous Creation Compared. 55 
 
 This subject will be treated more at length in a future chapter. 
 
 Having explained what we are to understand by the process of 
 Evolution, we will now consider the rival claims of Immediate 
 (Instantaneous) Creation, or Creation without the intervention of 
 Secondary laws ; and Creation by Evolution, or Creation through 
 the medium of Secondary laws. . 
 
 Let us first study the ground upon which their claims are equal — 
 
 Scriptural authority for the one is the same as for the other. 
 The first chapter of Genesis simply asserts the fact of Creation, it 
 does not attempt to explain the method by which Creation was ac- 
 complished. In a word, we are not to look upon the first chapter 
 of Genesis as an effort to give a scientific exposition of the Uni- 
 verse, but we must view it purely as a revelation, impressed by a 
 series of reiterated assertions, in order to fill the mind more com- 
 pletely with the one sublime fact that, in the beginning, God did 
 create all things. 
 
 Prejudices once rooted in the mind are hard to overthrow, and 
 the persistence with which intelligent and cultured men have in- 
 sisted on a literal interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis will 
 always remain a striking illustration of the fact. 
 
 It must be borne in mind that Genesis was written at a time 
 when even the most civilized part of the world was steeped in ig- 
 norance and barbarism, and the little knowledge that did exist was 
 entirely confined to the priesthood. The masses of the people, 
 both high and low, were just emerging from a savage condition, 
 and their intellectual state was too weak to grasp anything but the 
 simplest facts and the barest statements. 
 
 Granting, then, that Moses, or whoever the author was, did ap- 
 preciate the full significance of what he wrote, he certainly would 
 not have attempted anything more than to open the eyes of the 
 people to the existence of one Supreme Being, the Creator and 
 Sustainer of all things. 
 
 Had he attempted a scientific exposition of the methods by 
 which God bronght into being His Creation, he would only have 
 confused their Savage minds, and obscured what he most wished 
 to impress. 
 
 Imagine Moses giving lectures on Evolution to the Children of 
 Israel in the wilderness ! Whilst we are not to regard, then, the 
 first chapter of Genesis as a scientific exposition, it is interesting 
 
56 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 to note, however, that a few changes of words, (words that bear 
 another interpretation in the Hebrew,) will give us a picture such 
 as the most advanced of scientific thinkers have painted for as. 
 Later on a running commentary of the first chapter of Grenesis 
 will be given, with the changes above referred to, and the reader 
 may judge for himself. 
 
 It is not surprising that the notion of Direct (instantaneous) 
 Creation should have been attached to the acts referred to in Grenesis. 
 Indeed, ignorance that Grod could have employed any other method 
 than that of modeling directly, as the artist forms his image, is a 
 sufficient explanation why the conception of Evolution has been 
 so long making its way. 
 
 Belief in Evolution presupposes no slight knowledge of nature 
 and the laws which govern her processes. Absence of the requi- 
 site scientific training will doom many minds, even in this enlight- 
 ened age, to remain a blank as to the methods by which the Su- 
 preme called into being His Creation. Such minds, if they form 
 any conception at all of Creation, can only conceive of the Creator 
 as molding the plastic clay and forming each member separately 
 and distinctly. Or, they may conceive of all animated Creation 
 suddenly springing from the bosom of the Earth, as _ Milton pic- 
 tures to us in the grandest poetical composition that the human 
 mind has produced. 
 
 "The grassy clods now calved; now half appeared 
 The tawny lion, pawing- to get free 
 His hinder parts, then springs, as broke from bonds, 
 And rampant shakes his blinded mane ; the ounce, 
 The libbard, and the tiger, as the mole 
 Rising, the crumbled Earth above them threw 
 In hillocks ; the swift stag from under ground 
 Bore up his branching head; scarce from his mold 
 Behemoth, biggest born of Earth, upheaved 
 His vastness ; * * * * " 
 
 This conception, which Grenesis no more warrants than any other 
 method of Creation, was the only one Milton could entertain, if 
 he thought upon the subject at all. His scientific knowledge was 
 not sufficient to enable him to form a Grander Conception than this. 
 Now, we must select that method as true which most redounds to 
 the glory of the Supreme Being; and this is our bound 'en duty. 
 The conception of Creation, under any circumstances, fills our 
 
Creation by Evolution and Instantaneous Creation Compared. 57 
 
 mind? with the grandeur and power of God ; but Creation by Evo- 
 lution gives us a far grander conception than that of direct creation- 
 This argument, alone, should determine oar selection between the 
 two ; but, in addition to this all-sufficient reason, there are other ar- 
 guments, drawn from the great book of nature, that should set at 
 rest all doubts upon the subject. 
 
 We will, then, arrange the arguments in favor of Creation by 
 Evolution under three heads, and, for easy comparison, place in a 
 parallel column the facts in relation to Instantaneous Creation. 
 
 Creation by Evolution. 
 
 I. It is not antagonistic to any- 
 thing contained in Scrip- 
 ture. 
 II. It carries with it a grander 
 conception of the wisdom, 
 power, and goodness of 
 the Supreme Being. 
 
 III. There is positive scientific 
 
 evidence, which appeals 
 to many with the force 
 of a mathematical dem- 
 onstration. 
 
 IV. It recognizes that the chain 
 
 of secondary causes set 
 on foot by Omnipotence 
 can never be exhausted 
 by a created Intelligence. 
 //. therefore, holds out to 
 the soul the promise of a 
 never-ending development. 
 
 The first of these propositions 
 we will proceed to the second. That the doctrine that Cod created 
 the world and all things else through the agency of law carries 
 with it a grander conception of His power and wisdom will not be 
 denied when the subject is examined. The mechanician who 
 could make a machine that could itself make another would justly 
 demand a greater degree of admiration for his skill than he who 
 
 l)ir>>ci or Instantaneous' Creation. 
 
 I. There is nothing in Scrip- 
 ture which favors it above 
 the other. 
 II. It tacitly limits the power 
 of the Creator, and, there- 
 fore, does not elevate our 
 minds as does the other. 
 
 III. Not only is there no scien- 
 
 tific evidence in its favor, 
 but it is absolutely at va- 
 riance with the writing 
 in the great book of na- 
 ture 
 
 IV. In assuming that the world 
 
 is a direct act of creation, 
 it affirms that a barrier has 
 been set to our progress, 
 and that we will ulti- 
 mately reach the bounds 
 of the attainable. 
 
 having already been examined, 
 
58 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 had merely manufactured a simple machine. In the first instance, 
 the author must not only take into account the perfect working of 
 the first contrivance as a simple machine, but he must so construct 
 its complicated parts that it will, of its own working, produce an- 
 other apparatus. 
 
 Let us suppose the case of three men : A makes a very compli- 
 cated machine for some particular purpose and is much praised 
 for his ingenuity and skill. B comes along, and, to outdo A, 
 makes an apparatus that will make A's machine without any in- 
 terference on his part, [f we admired A's achievement and won- 
 dered at his skill, what shall we say of B's wonderful work? 
 Another man, C, hearing of this wondrous machine, proceeds to 
 invent an apparatus which will make A's machine, which, in its 
 turn, will make B's machine, and this still another, without any 
 interference from him. How shall we compare this last man's 
 skill with that of the other two ? Can there be a question as to 
 which of these three men was the most skillful? Now, the Evo- 
 lutionist believes in a God who is sufficiently powerful to make 
 laws that will make laws, and these, others, and so on, until the 
 whole Universe is evolved. 
 
 No reasonable man will deny that C is as much the author of 
 the last machine as of the first ; so, no just thinker will deny that 
 God made the Universe. 
 
 We may take C's series of machines as a good illustration of 
 the great truth which has been so much insisted upon in the fore- 
 going pages, namely, that cause must be more complicated than 
 effect. The first machine evidently contained within itself the 
 causative power which produced all the others. In the process 
 by which the final machine came into being, the evolution of the 
 first machine is completed, and all the powers stored up in it by 
 the author are unfolded in this final effect. 
 
 The theory of Evolution so expounded is beautiful to contem- 
 plate. It elevates our conception of Almighty Power, and it is in 
 accord with all that we know of the workings of His laws. 
 
 From a minute speck of protoplasm, called an egg, is evolved 
 man, whose intellect has subdued nature, and made her subservient 
 to his wishes. In that minute mass of albumen, man existed po- 
 tentially^ but it required the fostering care of the Creator's laws to 
 guide the embryo in its progress towards development. Keeping 
 
Creation by Evolution and Instantaneous Creation Compared. 59 
 
 the Creator's Omni fie Hand always before his mental vision, the 
 Evolutionist sees no difficulty, nor has any repugnance, in descend- 
 ing to the brutes to seek his immediate progenitors. Nor need he 
 stop here; but, passing on down the scale of Being, he may cross 
 the apparently broad gulf which separates the living from the non- 
 living, and recognize in the atoms of the "Oosmical Vapor" his 
 remote ancestors. But he does not stop here ; having reached this 
 lowest conceivable point, he ascends until, kneeling at the throne 
 of the Living God, he beholds the ineffable source from which he 
 sprang. There is nothing in this philosophy to shock the sensi- 
 bilities of the most Orthodox Christian, and religious scruples 
 should not stand in the way of its adoption if the individual can 
 see in it a sufficient scientific warrant. 
 
 <m? 
 
60 Etiolation versus Involution. 
 
 Chapter III 
 
 AsTROGENESIS,* OR THE EVOLUTION OF WORLDS. 
 
 " The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth his 
 handiwork." 
 
 "In the beginning," the Universe " was without form and void, 
 and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the deep." In 
 obedience to the fiat of Omnipotence, the atoms sprang into exist- 
 ence. He appoints to each its mission, and impresses upon it the 
 seal of His Almighty Will. The atomic host, obeying the law of 
 Universal gravitation which the Supreme had set upon them, to 
 a center rush, and, such the force of impact, that intense heat and 
 light are generated. 
 
 This heavenly warfare is carried on throughout the illimitable 
 expanse, and each grand center of attraction is destined to bring 
 forth a Stellar Universe. And now the rythmic pulsations of the 
 "music of the Spheres" break in upon the silence of the infinite 
 void, and from each revolving orb an anthem of praise ascends to 
 Him whose power brought it into being. 
 
 These Stellar or Astral systems, dotting the boundless ocean of 
 space, may be likened to the archipelagoes which diversify the 
 waters of the globe. A number of these Astral sytems may unite 
 to form another and grander system, which we will call a Poly- 
 astral system ; and a number of Polyastral systems may unite to 
 form a still grander system. And so on, wheel within wheel, 
 until the imagination, overpowered by the contemplation, sinks 
 back confounded. 
 
 A survey of the heavens on a cloudless night will reveal to the 
 naked eye of ordinary power several thousand stars scattered 
 broadcast over the vault above. It will also observe a whitish 
 band spanning the heavens, separating into two at one point. 
 This luminous appearance is the Milky Way, the astral system 
 to which our Sun and all the stars visible to the naked eye be- 
 
 * Gr. Astron, a star; and Genesis, production or generation. 
 
. 1 serogenesis. 
 
 61 
 
 long. We are indebted to the great Herschel for this discovery. 
 After years of observation and study, lie arrived at the conclu- 
 sion that the astral system to which we belong is in shape like an 
 irregular disk deeply cleft on one side. In order bo form a clear 
 idea of the shape of our star system and of our own position in 
 it, let Fig. 1 represent a vertical section of this disk. When viewed 
 
 from above, it would present a circular appearance, whilst from the 
 side it would present the appearance depicted in the diagram. The 
 Sun, S, is situated in the substance of the disk or lens, and near to 
 the point /), which represents the spot at which the milky way 
 separates into two bands. 
 
 Now, when we survey the heavens on a clear night, and direct 
 our gaze to any part of the vault except along the track of the 
 milky way, we are viewing this disk of stars along its shortest 
 diameters, that is. along the lines SA, SB, SD, SH, SO, SN, SM, 
 and all lines which do not correspond to the great diameters of the 
 lens. When thus viewed, the range of stars seen is a very brief 
 one; hence there is no nebulous appearance. But. if we permit the 
 eye to follow the milky way. we view this disk of stars along its 
 greatest diameters, that is, along the lines .SV r ', ,S'A'. SF, and along 
 lines lying in the same plane with these but perpendicular to the 
 paper; the mass of stars through which we now look is so great. 
 and their distance so tremendous, that a nebulous appearance is 
 the result. The general reader, in attempting to form a true con- 
 ception of the shape of our star cluster, will unci his imagination 
 materially assisted by thinking of a flattened turnip, or a watch, 
 with a deep horizontal notch on one side. A vertical section of 
 such a turnip will present the appearance in the Fig. He will 
 thus easily realize the fact that in looking along diameters corre- 
 sponding with the lines SG, SE, SF, he will see a greater mass of 
 stars than by looking along any other diameters. He will also 
 
62 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 fully appreciate the fact that such an appearance as the milky way 
 is to be expected from the shape of the cluster and our position 
 in it. 
 
 The constellations are wedges cut out of this turnip. For ex- 
 ample, the Great Bear lies between the lines SO and SH, and, con- 
 sequently, it contains but few very small stars. Constellations 
 along the lines SA, SB, SD, would contain still fewer very small 
 stars ; but constellations along the great diameters, or, in other 
 words, along the track of the milky way, are enriched by a bril- 
 liant back-ground of star dust. 
 
 But Herschel's ambitious mind was not content with discovering 
 the shape of the star cluster of the milky way ; he also attempted 
 to number the individual suns composing it. After a long series 
 of observations, he arrived at the conclusion that there could not 
 be less than eighteen millions, and that there were probably more 
 than twenty millions of stars in the system to which we belong. 
 Each one of these stars is a sun ; many of them far exceeding our 
 own in grandeur, and carrying along a retinue of planets far exceed- 
 ing in number, it may be, those which revolve around our own Sun. 
 
 To form some conception of the magnitude of the distances 
 which separate our own Sun from other Suns in the nebula of the 
 milky way, let us take the speed of light in a second of time as 
 our measuring rod. Light will travel nearly eight times around the 
 Earth in a single beat of the pendulum. Now, it requires this 
 agile messenger not less, and probably much more, than three 
 years to come from the nearest star (Alpha Centaur) to us. The 
 ray of light which left the Pole Star thirty years ago, Earthward 
 bound, has not yet arrived, and will probably require some years 
 longer before it reaches its destination. Such are the magnitudes 
 of these distances that astronomers, for a long time, were unable 
 to compute them even approximately. Improved instruments have 
 enabled them to make rude calculations, and the results so obtained 
 are always rather under than above the true distance. It has been 
 estimated that it requires thousands of years for a ray of light to 
 cross the greatest diameter of our Astral System. Well may the 
 mind stagger at such revelations. But as immense as it is, our 
 Star Cluster is but a point in the Yast Universe. Buried in the 
 depths of space, at distances that it requires light millions of years 
 to span, are thousands on thousands of other astral systems as large* 
 
Astroyenesis. 
 
 63 
 
 or larger, than our own. Over 5,000 of these nebula' have been 
 tabulated, and as the powers of the telescope are increased, new 
 ones come into view. Many of these have been resolved into stars, 
 but there are others which are still in a gaseous state. These flam- 
 ing masses of matter, whirling around in the abysses of space, de- 
 monstrate to us, beyond a reasonable doubt, the truth of the Evo- 
 lution of worlds from a nebulous mass. 
 
 (Fig. 2. Spiral Nebula in the Virgin.) 
 
 Fig. 2 represents one of these revolving masses of cosmical 
 vapor.* Here we have the process of world formation going on 
 before our very eyes. 
 
 Our own astral system may unite with other systems, which the 
 telescope has revealed to form a Polyastral system, and this Poly- 
 
 * Whilst it is possible that the theory of the mechanism of world formation, 
 as now understood, may undergo modification with advancing knowledge, yet 
 the main feature of the nebular hypothesis, viz : that all matter was once in a 
 nebulous condition, will never be refuted. 
 
64 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 astral system is probably a unit in another and still grander system, 
 and this in still another ; and so on until the imagination succumbs, 
 overpowered by the picture which its own daring has created. 
 
 Reasoning from analogy, there is every reason to believe that 
 the whole Material Universe is revolving as a -whole around some 
 grand center ; and this point of space, it is rational to conclude, en- 
 joys in a peculiar manner the manifestation of the Divine Power. 
 From the Deity, as a center, all things radiate ; to the Deity must 
 all things converge. Well may the mind ask if there is any limit 
 to the Material Universe. Yes, as vast as it is, there must be a 
 limit ; the Universe is a creature, and cannot equal its Creator ; 
 God alone is infinite. 
 
 The gaseous nature of many of these nebulas has been demon- 
 strated by Dr. Draper and others, through the agency of the spec- 
 troscope. In them we have ocular demonstration of the great 
 truth of world evolution, first suggested by the Greeks, and in 
 modern times elaborated by Kant and Laplace. 
 • This theory is substantially as follows : The matter of which 
 the Material Universe is composed was once equally diffused 
 throughout space. Under the influence of the Universal law of 
 the attraction of gravitation, various centers of attraction would 
 be developed. Now, it is a well-known physical law that fluids 
 rushing to a center cause a rotary movement in the whole mass. 
 Intense heat would also be generated by the Universal friction re- 
 sulting. Revolution on an axis would bring into play centrifugal 
 and centripetal forces. Under the influence of the tangential or cen- 
 trifugal force, there would be a constant flow of matter toward the 
 equator of the revolving mass. Eventually, the centrifugal force 
 would become so great at this point, owing to the increased rapidity 
 of the rotary motion, that the centripetal force, or the attraction of 
 gravity, would be no longer able to counteract it ; the result would 
 be that an equatorial ring, somewhat denser than the central 
 mass, owing to the radiation of its heat, would be detached, and 
 the size of the ring would be in proportion to the fluidity of the 
 central body and the rapidity of its revolution. The parent body, 
 undergoing further condensation, would gradually leave the ring 
 behind. Eventually, this ring would rupture, and, coalescing into 
 one globular mass, become a satellite revolving around the central 
 body. This process would be repeated until the density of the 
 
Astrogenesis. 65 
 
 central mass had become so much increased, and its rotary motion 
 so much diminished, as to enable the attraction of gravity to suc- 
 cessfully antagonize the centrifugal force. 
 
 Tennyson has beautifully embodied the theory in the following 
 magnificent lines : 
 
 " This world was once a fluid haze of light, 
 Till toward the center set the starry tides, 
 And eddied into suns, that wheeling cast 
 The planets." 
 
 According to the theory, therefore, our Sun once filled the entire 
 space now occupied by the Solar System, and the planets were 
 successively thrown from its surface. First Neptune, then Uranus, 
 Saturn, Jupiter, the Asteroids, one after another in quick succes- 
 sion, then Mars, the Earth, Venus, and, lastly, Mercury. It is 
 possible that another planet exists between Mercury and the Sun, 
 but its existence rests on insufficient evidence. The Satellites of 
 the various planets were thrown off from their surfaces in the same 
 way that they themselves were thrown from the Sun. The rings 
 of Saturn seem to furnish corroborative testimony of the truth of 
 the nebular hypothesis, for by it their existence receives a rational 
 explanation. Besides the rings. Saturn is accompanied by a large 
 family of moons. Why the last rings thrown off failed to coalesce 
 into moons, is not easy to conjecture. However, it has been de- 
 monstrated that these rings are not solid, as was at one time sup. 
 posed, but consist of small fragments revolving around the planet. 
 In other words, they are bands of meteors circling around the 
 parent mass. There are a number of facts common to all the 
 planets which receive a rational interpretation on the supposition 
 that the nebular hypothesis is true. 
 
 1. They all revolve in orbits, the planes of which pass through 
 the centre of the sun. These planes are not exactly coincident, 
 but their divergence is not great. 
 
 2. They all revolve around the sun, in the same direction that 
 it revolves on its own axis. 
 
 3. They all revolve on their own axes in the same direction that 
 the sun does on his, and their satellites obey the same law. 
 
 The three laws of Kepler show the close relation subsisting 
 among the planets. Kepler, by the light of these, was led to be- 
 lieve that there existed a planet between the orbits of Mars and 
 5 
 
66 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Jupiter, but he did not live to see it demonstrated. In 1772, the 
 Astronomer Bode declared that the conjecture of Kepler would be 
 found to be an actual fact, and enunciated the law which bears his 
 name, by means of which the Asteroids were afterwards discovered. 
 
 This law is as follows : 
 
 Supposing 4 to represent the distance of Mercury from the Sun, 
 the distances of the other planets are obtained by adding to this 
 number a geometrical series, of which 3 is the first term, increasing 
 by the ratio 2. 
 
 This may be formulated thus : If we add the No. 4 to each of 
 the following, 0, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, 96, 192, 384, the resulting num- 
 bers, 4, 7, 10, 16, 28, 52, 100, 196, 388, will represent very closely 
 the relative distances of the planets from the Sun. 
 
 From this law Bode predicted that a plajnet would be discovered 
 between Mars and Jupiter, corresponding to the number 28. But 
 the actual discovery was not made until after his death by Piazzi, 
 Oberling, and Harding, who determined the existence of the first 
 four Asteroids in the place that Bode predicted a planet would be 
 found. 
 
 The law holds pretty well for all the planets except Neptune. 
 By comparing the distances called for by Bode's law. and the dis- 
 tances determined by observation, this can be appreciated. 
 
 
 >> 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 oj 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 
 A 
 
 B 
 
 u 
 
 p. 
 
 u 
 3 
 
 P 
 a 
 
 13 
 ft 
 
 
 s 
 
 > 
 
 
 1 
 
 < 
 
 2 
 
 1-5 
 
 03 
 CO 
 
 S3 
 
 
 By Bode's law, . 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 16 
 
 28 
 
 52 
 
 100 
 
 196 
 
 388 
 
 By observation, 
 
 3.87 
 
 7.23 
 
 10 
 
 15.23 
 
 26.25 
 
 52.3 
 
 95.39 
 
 191.82 
 
 300 
 
 It will be observed that the only great discrepancy exists in the 
 case of Neptune. 
 
 Sufficient evidence has been adduced to demonstrate beyond a 
 reasonable doubt that the nebular hypothesis is the true explana- 
 tion of the manner in which the solar system, and, probably, the 
 whole material Universe, came into being. 
 
 We have seen how the Earth was thrown from the Sun in a 
 molten state, and how the moon, in its turn, was developed from 
 the Earth. 
 
 By the continued condensation and shrinkage of the molten 
 
Astrogenesis. 67 
 
 mass, the present dimensions of the Earth were reached. Its figure, 
 which is a sphere, bulging at the Equator, and slightly flattened at 
 the poles, is what we would naturally expect from the action of 
 centrifugal force acting upon a plastic mass. The great chemical 
 activity going on at this period of the Earth's history resulted in 
 the combination of Oxygen and Hydrogen in proportions to form 
 water. At first this existed as vapor, which surrounded the Earth 
 with an envelope of great thickness. As the surface gradually 
 cooled, a temperature was at last reached below the point necessary 
 to keep the water suspended as aqueous vapor. Condensation then 
 began, and this was followed by its precipitation upon the face of 
 the Earth as rain. The surface of the planet soon became en- 
 veloped in one continuous ocean, and then followed a series of up- 
 heavals and subsidences, caused either by the shrinkage of the 
 central molten mass, and consequent wrinkling up of the Earth's 
 crust, or by internal convulsions, or by both. Later on, life, both 
 vegetable and animal, began to make its appearance in the waters, 
 and soon the unlimited expanse of ocean teemed with organic 
 beings. In course of time, the points of land upheaved by in- 
 ternal convulsions, or by the natural process of shrinkage, re- 
 mained above the waters a sufficient length of time to allow of the 
 development of land life, both vegetable and animal. The main 
 mountain chains and plateaus, and the beds of the oceans now ex- 
 isting, were more the result of the shrinking process than of in- 
 ternal convulsions, though volcanic action must have existed on 
 a scale of which we cannot form the most remote conception. 
 
 Such, then, is the history of our planet from the time that it 
 existed as a nebulous mass of incandescent matter floating through 
 space until it was evolved into a world fit for the abode of organic 
 life. 
 
 Having produced some of the evidence upon which is based 
 the doctrine of Evolution in its relation to the formation of worlds, 
 it remains to show that this same process of Evolution has brought 
 about existing vegetable and animal life. We will first consider 
 the evidence, and, later on, endeavor to show the probable manner 
 in which this development took place. 
 
Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Chapter IV. 
 
 Arguments for the Doctrine of Evolution Drawn from the Field of 
 
 Living Nature. 
 
 In the preceding chapter, we considered the evidence for the 
 doctrine of Evolution drawn from the study of the constitution of 
 the solar system and the configuration of our own globe. We will 
 now marshal the arguments drawn from the field of organic nature, 
 and which lie scattered around us on every hand. 
 
 Section I. 
 
 Evidence from Ontogenesis, or the Evolution of the Individual Form; the Ani- 
 mal from the Egg, the Plant from the Seed — The Metamorphosis of certain 
 animals — Significance of rudimentary organs. 
 
 In the Evolution of the chick from the egg, and the plant from 
 the seed, we see familiar instances of the Evolutionary process. 
 In the apparently simple, but really complex, constitution of the 
 fecundated egg we behold a wonder wrought as great as the Evo- 
 lution of a world from a nebulous mass. The astronomer has 
 traced the various stages of growth in the embryo world, so the 
 biologist has traced the various stages in the embryonic growth of 
 the plant and animal. The astronomer gives certain names to 
 certain forces, whose existence he is compelled to assume in order 
 to explain the various processes of world-development, but the real 
 nature of which are unknown, to him; so the biologist recognizes 
 the existence of certain forces which govern the development of 
 the albuminous mass of the ovum into the animal, but the real 
 nature of these forces is as much beyond him as the force of 
 gravitation is beyond the astronomer. Under the term u vital 
 force" or principle of vitality, the biologist embodies a recognition 
 of these obscure forces which govern the processes called vital, but 
 these phrases, which will be examined more carefully in a future 
 chapter, are to be regarded simply as substitutes for more accurate 
 knowledge. We know that there are certain causes which set on 
 foot the peculiar activity in the albuminous mass of the ovum, 
 
Ontogenesis. 69 
 
 which eventually lead to the production of a new being, and, in 
 the absence of more exhaustive knowledge of the true nature of 
 these causes, we are justified, and, indeed, necessitated, to embrace 
 them under the name "vital force."* 
 
 When we contemplate the wonderful metamorphosis which the 
 egg undergoes under the influence of these vital forces, we should 
 no longer regard the Evolution of animated nature as a matter of 
 astonishment, but, on the contrary, should consider it as something 
 to be looked for. 
 
 The Evolutionist simply claims that what we see enacting be- 
 fore us in a few weeks or months in the production of an indi- 
 vidual, has been, and is being, enacted in the production of ani- 
 mated nature as a whole. He simply claims that the first germs 
 of life which appeared on the globe were the ova, from which all 
 organic life has been developed. Both processes are essentially 
 similar, the chief difference being the time required. 
 
 The ovum of the individual human being requires but nine 
 months to pass through the process, but the ovum of the Race has re- 
 quired some millions of years. What the environment of the indi- 
 vidual egg is to its development, that, the environment of the phys- 
 ical world, through all ages, has been to the egg of animated nature. 
 
 It may excite some surprise in the mind of the general reader 
 to learn that the egg of all mammalian animals, including man, 
 are so similar in appearance that they cannot be distinguished from 
 one another. The egg of Oviparous animals, as the Bird, Reptile, 
 and Fish, being destined to develop the new creature outside of 
 the body of the mother, is furnished with a store of nutritive ma- 
 terial, consisting of an albuminous envelope, known as the white 
 of the egg, and a central yellow mass, called the nutritive yelk. 
 The fully-developed egg of such animals is therefore much larger 
 than that of the higher animals which give birth to their young. 
 But if the egg of a bird, reptile, or fish be examined before it has 
 acquired these investing envelopes of nutritive material, its simi- 
 larity to that of the higher animals is at once apparent. If we 
 compare the primitive hen egg, the primitive fish egg, and the 
 primitive human egg, this similarity will be at once appreciated. 
 
 * Mr. Huxley ridicules this phrase, but without reason, for it pretends to 
 nothing more than a recognition of the existence of unknown forces. 
 
70 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 In Fig. 3 is represented the primitive egg of a fish, hen, and 
 human being, all very much enlarged. So similar are they in 
 apparent structure that the microscope can detect no difference 
 among them. 
 
 The parts that can be distinguished have received the following 
 names : 
 
 1. The investing membrane, a, (Vitelline Membrane.) 
 
 2. The inclosed protoplasm or formative yelk, b, (Vitellus.) 
 
 3. The nucleus or germinal vesicle, c, (Vesicula germanativa.) 
 
 4. The germinal spot, d, (Macula germinativa.) 
 
 5. The germinal point within the germinal spot, but this latter 
 is not always distinguishable. 
 
 Now, this description will not only serve for the ovum of a 
 human being, but it will also serve as a picture of the sponge egg 
 as well ! Such is the similarity of the primitive egg of all animals 
 whatsoever. The ovum of all creatures is a cell, consisting of a 
 cell wall, cell contents, nucleus, and nucleolus. 
 
 TTig. 3 
 
 A. Primitive egg of a Fish. B. Primitive egg of a Hen. C. Primitive 
 egg of Man, all very much enlarged — natural size about T ^ T of an inch. 
 
 a. Vitelline, or investing membrane. 
 
 b. Vitellus, or inclosed protoplasm. 
 
 c. The nuclev s, or germinal vesicle. 
 
 d. The germinal spot. 
 
 e. The germinal point. 
 
 The primitive egg of all animals is an apparently simple cell 
 and capable of changing its shape. 
 
 In its fully developed condition the ovum of a human being is 
 about one tenth of a line (y^o of an inch) in diameter, and the ovum 
 of all mammalia is about the same size and cannot be distinguished 
 from one another even by the aid of the microscope ! This fact 
 should warn us not to place too much importance on sensible qual- 
 ities, and should teach those who say that ■• the egg is so simple 
 
Ontogenesis. 71 
 
 • 
 
 that it can be described in a line," that the true structure of the 
 egg is so complex and hidden that even the highest powers of the 
 microscope are of no avail. The egg of an oyster produces an 
 oyster, the egg of the human being produces a human being, their 
 sensible characters are the same. What is the inference? Why, 
 that the tendencies or kites which enwrap the egg constitute its 
 grand distinguishing features. 
 
 This apparent similarity of the ovum exists also in 1 ' the embryo 
 up to a certain point of development. The first step in the devel- 
 opmental process of the fertilized ovum, whether it be destined to 
 bring forth a man, a fish, or an oyster, are the same. This con- 
 sists in the breaking up of the yelk substance into cells, which, 
 cohering, form a membrane. This yelk cleavage is common to all 
 animals whatsoever, and something analogous to it takes place in 
 the vegetable world, in the granulating process which the contents 
 of the female vegetable cell undergo after its union with the male 
 cell. 
 
 Among many of the lower animals, propagation also takes place 
 asexually by division, and the formation of buds and spores. m But 
 even among the lowest of the animal creation, (with, perhaps, the 
 exception of the lowest moneron, which is merely a mass of pro- 
 toplasm without cell structure,*) true sexual propagation may take 
 place by the direct union of a male and female principle. Two of 
 these creatures, which are apparently nothing more than simple 
 cells, have often been observed to come together and coalesce into 
 one ; the contents of the amalgamated cell then undergo genuine 
 cleavage into numerous cells, each of which is a new creature sim- 
 ilar to its parents. When the cleavage process is complete, the 
 membrane of the parent cell raptures, and the new creatures es- 
 cape and commence an independent existence. 
 
 Among the higher animals, the formation of germinal layers 
 from the substance of the yelk takes place as follows : The appa- 
 rently homogeneous mass of yelk protoplasm undergoes transform- 
 ation into cells, and a membrane (the Blastodermic membrane) con- 
 sisting of cells investing what is left of the yelk, is the result. f 
 
 * The Male and Female principles were probably not evolved until the prim- 
 ordial Zooplmm had reached the cell stage in its upward growth. 
 
 tin the bird, reptile, and fish egg only the formative yelk, or " tread" un- 
 dergoes this cleavage into cells. 
 
72 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 This membrane divides into two, the external (the Ectoderm) and 
 internal (the Endoderm) blastodermic membranes. Later on a 
 third membrane is produced between them called the Mesoderm. 
 The Mesoderm, in its turn, undergoes division into two. At this 
 stage, therefore, the embryo consists of four germinal layers or 
 membranes. 
 
 1. The Ectoderm, which is destined to bring forth the skin and 
 
 its appendages. 
 
 2. The External and Internal layers of the Mesoderm, which pro- 
 
 duces the nervous, muscular, osseous, and vascular systems, 
 and the various viscera. 
 
 3. The Endoderm, which produces the lining membrane of the 
 
 alimentary canal. If the Egg is destined to bring forth a 
 fish, reptile, bird, or mammal, a groove makes its appearance 
 in the germinal spot. This groove is gradually deepened as 
 the germinal layers grow up around it, and finally coalesce 
 above it, converting the groove into a canal. In this canal 
 is produced the spinal cord. Whilst this is going on, two 
 lateral plates are growing out on either side, which, meeting 
 below, form the abdominal cavity. 
 It is not the purpose of the writer to give a description of em- 
 bryonic development, but simply to point out the parallelism which 
 ^exists in all embryonic growth up to a certain point, and to draw 
 therefrom the inference that, in the remote past, they might have had 
 their origin in a common type of life. This subject will be again 
 referred to when we come to study the growth of animal life on 
 the globe, and then its true significance will be better appreciated. 
 What the Egg is to the animal the Seed is to the plant. 
 The examination of the interior of a wheat grain, or the seed of 
 any vegetable whatsoever, reveals the presence of an embryo plant. 
 The mass of the seed serves the same purpose to the plant germ 
 that the albumen and immense yelk development of a chicken's 
 egg does to it, namely, it supplies the growing plant with food 
 until it is sufficiently mature to strike root into the Earth and draw 
 its nourishment thence. This embryonic plant originally existed 
 as a simple cell (a plant egg cell ) which, being fertilized by union 
 with a male plant cell, is converted into an embryonic plant, and 
 this process is carried on during the growth and ripening of the 
 seed. When the seed is fully mature, it is thrown from the parent 
 
Ontogenesis. 73 
 
 stem, and, meeting with proper conditions, the germ takes on de- 
 velopment, and, in course of time, reproduces its parent 
 
 The conversion of a simple plant cell into a parent plant cell, 
 by the union of the male and female principles, is initiated by the 
 transformation of the apparently homogeneous cell contents into a 
 granular mass, and this step in the plant cell is in all respects an- 
 alogous to the yelk cleavage which takes place in the animal cell. 
 
 The Evolutionist who is disposed to carry out analogies to their 
 furthest limit may recognize five different kinds of Eggs in the 
 Universe : 
 
 1. The Ontogenetic Egg, or the egg which produces the individual 
 
 animal or plant. 
 
 2. The Zoogenetic Egg,* or the first germs of animal life, from 
 
 which the whole animal creation has been developed. 
 
 3. The Phytogenetic Egg, or the first germs of vegetable life, from 
 
 which the whole vegetable creation has been brought forth. 
 
 4. The Biogenetic Egg, or the first germs of life in general, being 
 
 the source from which the two preceding have sprung. 
 
 5. The Astrogenetic Egg, or the Material Universe as it existed in 
 
 the nebular state. The cleavage of this uniform nebulous 
 mass into worlds may be likened to the process which we see 
 taking place in the animal and vegetable egg cell. Thus the 
 whole Material Universe maybe compared to a huge animal? 
 but what a lifeless carcass it would be were it not for the all- 
 pervading Spirit of Omnipotence : 
 Having noticed the very familiar process of the Evolution of an 
 animal from the Egg, we will now direct our attention to another 
 familiar example of Evolution, namely, the transformation by Evo- 
 lution of certain animals from one type of life to another. 
 
 Every one knows that a tadpole, if he live long enough, will 
 certainly turn into a frog, and the singular appearance which these 
 creatures present when they are just about to complete the meta- 
 morphosis has excited the mirth and wonder of many a juvenile 
 of ten summers. It is only in comparatively recent times that the 
 full significance of that change has been appreciated. In this 
 
 * Zoon, an animal; and Genesis, production. 
 Phuton, a plant. 
 Bios, life. 
 A sir on, a star. 
 
74 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 metaraorphisis of a fish into a true reptile, nature reads us a lesson, 
 and teaches us that what may occur in the individual, {ontogeneti- 
 cally,) may also occur in the race, (phylogenetically.) 
 
 I have said that the tadpole is a fish, and so it is, for it is a gill- 
 breather, and can only exist in the water. In the course of its 
 Evolution into a frog, the tadpole gradually developes a lung, and, 
 when the transformation is half complete, it presents us with the 
 true Amphibian* type, that is, an animal which possesses both 
 gills and lung, and which can breathe either air or water. As the 
 change progresses, the lungs become more and more developed at 
 the expense of the gills, which grow less and less, and, finally, 
 when the lungs are fully formed, the gills have entirely disap- 
 peared, and the tadpole becomes an air-breathing frog. 
 
 Simultaneous with the change in the breathing apparatus occur 
 changes in other internal organs. The heartf acquires a third 
 cavity, and the outward form loses the fish-like character, and 
 true limbs are developed — first the fore limbs, then the hind limbs, 
 and, finally, the tail drops off. The animal now hops about on 
 land, a perfect air-breathing frog. 
 
 The same transformation occurs in the larva of the newt, {Tri- 
 ton Cristatus.) The stages of development are exactly similar — 
 first, the animal is a fish, then an Amphibian, and, lastly, a reptile. 
 In order more fully to appreciate these changes in the life of an 
 individual, it will be well to mention that the true Amphibians 
 now existing are to be regarded as the connecting links between 
 the fish and reptile. Such are the Lepidosiren Paradoxa, discov- 
 ered by Dr. Natterer, in the river Amazon, and the Lepidosiren 
 annectans, found in the river Gambia. Also the mud eel of South 
 Carolina, {siren lacertina,) and the Axoloil of Mexico. All these 
 creatures possess both gills, and lungs throughout their whole life. 
 Whilst they are true amphibians by nature, yet it is possible that 
 they might all be deprived of their water life without necessarily 
 
 * From G-r. Amphi, double ; and Bios, life. 
 
 The word Amphibian is often used to embrace animals which live in the 
 water, but which breathe air alone, and, in this sense, includes whales, por- 
 poises, &c. But the word should be limited to those animals that have both 
 gills and lungs. 
 
 t The development of another cavity in the heart is the result of the devel- 
 opment of the lung. 
 
Ontogenesis. 75 
 
 causing death. As an illustration of this, the Axolotl furnishes 
 a good example. A number of these creatures were kept in the 
 Jardin des Plantes at Paris. Several individuals escaped from the 
 water in which they were placed, and w T hen found some time after, 
 they had lost their gills. This caused no little excitement among 
 scientific men, for it demonstrated that a type of life, before con- 
 sidered absolutely permanent, could be changed by altering the 
 external conditions under which it lived. The metamorphosis of 
 the caterpillar into a butterfly is as familiar, or more so, than the 
 examples we have just cited. The butterfly laj^s its eggs iu a fav- 
 orable situation and the young caterpillars are hatched. During the 
 progress of their growth, they pass through several moulting pro- 
 cesses, and finally the caterpillar reaches its full size. The cater- 
 pillar is a true worm, both in external appearance and internal or- 
 ganization. But this worm is destined to pass into another state 
 of being, in which its old form entirely disappears and a new order 
 of being results. It forms a chrysalis, and either buries itself in 
 the ground or hangs itself upon a branch. Here it lies dormant, 
 as far as outward motion is concerned, for a considerable length of 
 time, but the organic activity going on during this period is mar-' 
 vellous; in this, its pupa state, the organization of the caterpillar, 
 both internal and external, undergoes a complete transformation. 
 
 When the change is completed, the perfect insect bursts its en- 
 casement and escapes, mounts aloft, making the air brilliant with 
 its delicate tints and rich hues. From the sluggish and unsightly 
 worm that can scarce drag itself along to the airy and beautiful 
 creature which rivals in the richness of its coloring the flowers of 
 the field — what a transition! We can now appreciate the sublime 
 sentiment that led the wise old Greeks to select the butterfly as 
 the symbol of the soul, (Psyche.) The soaring spirit lies entombed 
 in its prison-house of clay, all its beauty disguised or concealed, all 
 its powers dormant ; only when it disencumbers itself of material 
 bonds can it attain to its full beauty and soar to those regions 
 where it is destined to expand throughout the long ages of eternity 
 The metamorphic processes above noted in the life of the frog and 
 the butterfly are common to nearly the entire lower creation. The 
 young animal on leaving the egg presents an entirely different 
 appearance from the parent form, and generally closely resembles. 
 a form just below it in the scale of being. Thus we have seen that 
 
76 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 the larva of the frog resembles and is, to all intents and purposes, 
 a fish ; the larva of a butterfly is a worm ; the larva of many of 
 the worms cannot be distinguished from the larva of a polyp ; the 
 larva of a star-fish resembles closely an infusorial anamalcule, as 
 does, also, the larva of a jelly-fish. These facts are significant of 
 their unity of origin. When the embryonic development of the 
 animal is studied, these relations and correspondencies are carried 
 still further back, even to the very starting-point of all animal de- 
 velopment. Later on, we will show that the human embryo in its 
 development passes through states which have their parallel in the 
 types of life existing on the globe. Thus the animal reproduces) 
 in its individual development, the conditions through which it 
 passed in its race development. 
 
 We will now consider the evidence furnished by the existence 
 of rudimentary organs in certain animals. Eudimentary organs 
 are those which take no part in the life of the animal ; they remain 
 in an undeveloped state and are of not the slightest use in the 
 economy of the individual. Such, for example, are the external 
 muscles of the human ear, the worm-like appendage attached to 
 the commencement of the large intestine, the teeth of whales which 
 never cut the gum, the splint bones attached to the cannon bone 
 of the horse, the eyes of the mole and certain fish. 
 
 The existence of these undeveloped organs, according to the 
 doctrine of special creation, could not receive an intelligible ex- 
 planation. It was said that they were retained for the sole pur- 
 pose of maintaining the type to which the individual belonged, 
 and other arguments equally unsatisfactory were advanced. 
 
 But, by the light of the doctrine of Evolution, all these prob- 
 lems are susceptible of a scientific explanation. These rudimentary 
 organs are nothing more than hereditary transmissions received 
 from remote ancestral forms, in whose life these organs played an 
 important part. Thus the external muscle of the human ear, 
 which are of no use to us whatever, are very essential among the 
 lower animals. The mole has no use for visual organs, for it passes 
 its life in utter darkness, but the mole's ancestors lived above 
 ground, and to them the possession of well- developed eyes was all- 
 important. So the splint bones, which are of not the slightest use 
 to the existing horse, are the relics of the lateral toes of its imme- 
 diate three-toed ancestor. 
 
Natural Selection. 77 
 
 Here, then, we have a scientific solution of a difficult problem 
 which at once recommends itself to our reason, and which does 
 not require us to violate the dictates of common sense and call in 
 question the Divine ordinance of the Universe. 
 
 We will now pass on to the evidence furnished by the truths of 
 natural selection, and consider its influence in originating the vari- 
 ous species of animal and vegetable life, by means of heredity and 
 adaptation to existing conditions, thereby insuring the survival of 
 the fittest. 
 
 Section II. 
 
 Evidence from Natural Selection, and the Resulting Mutation of Species. 
 
 The greatest difficulty the doctrine of Evolution has had to con- 
 tend against is the rooted conviction that species are immutable, 
 and can undergo no change. According to the Special Creationist, 
 the species are the units, created separately, which go to make up 
 the whole of animated nature, both animal and vegetable. These 
 same naturalists have recognized the possibility that varieties may 
 arise in a species by a process of natural selection, but they deny 
 that species may arise in the same way. To show the inconsistency 
 manifested in this artificial and arbitrary division of nature, it is 
 only necessary to draw attention to the fact that scarcely any two 
 naturalists were agreed as to what belonged to one species, and 
 what to another. Two men studying the same animal forms, in 
 nine cases out of ten, would group them differently ; the forms 
 placed by one man under a certain species would be classed with 
 a different species by another. This diversity of opinion about 
 the same individual animals is demonstrative proof that species 
 are not separated from one another by impassable barriers, and it 
 furthermore proves that a species is not a unit of creation any more 
 than a variety. 
 
 A semblance of truth was given to the doctrine of the perm a. 
 nence of species by the discovery that certain hybrid forms, or 
 crosses between so-called species, were generally sterile, and the 
 dictum that " animals incapable of common offspring cannot have 
 sprung from common ancestors" became the test for species. But 
 it is obvious that such a test as this could only be applied in a very 
 limited waj r , and the great body of animals and plants would have 
 
78 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 remained forever unclassified if naturalists bad waited to ascertain 
 the genuineness of species by this method. It is evident, therefore) 
 that other methods have to be resorted to to classify the various 
 forms of animated nature, and the only 'practical guides to accom- 
 plish this are resemblance in structure. The result is that no two 
 authorities are exactly agreed as to the forms to be placed under a 
 given species. 
 
 Mr. Darwin thus summarizes his views, arrived at by long study 
 and observation : "First crosses between forms sufficiently dis- 
 tinct to be ranked as species and their hybrids are very generally, 
 but not universally, sterile. The sterility is of all degrees, and is 
 often so slight that the most careful experimentalists have arrived 
 at diametrically opposite conclusions in ranking forms by this test. 
 The sterility is innately variable in individuals of the same species, 
 and is eminently susceptible to the action of favorable and un- 
 favorable conditions." The opinions thus expressed by one of the 
 first naturalists of the nineteenth century are not to be attributed 
 to prejudice, but they are the result of experimental research, care- 
 fully planned and carried out. We are, therefore, compelled to 
 acknowledge that the groups called species are not immutable, but, 
 like varieties, are subject to change. 
 
 Let us, then, have a clear idea of what we are to understand by 
 the words Variety, Species, Genus, Order, &c. These are artificial 
 divisions which enable us to group together allied forms for the 
 purpose of studying their mutual relations, and the relations they 
 bear to animated nature as a whole. The only exact natural divi- 
 sion that we possess is the individual form. Now, by grouping 
 together individuals that are most nearly alike, we get a Variety ; by 
 grouping together varieties that bear the closest resemblance to one 
 another we get a Species, and throwing together the species that 
 resemble we get the Genus. 
 
 Now, all naturalists admit that varieties run into one another by 
 insensible gradations, and also acknowledge that new varieties may 
 arise by the perpetuation of structural changes which have proved 
 beneficial to the individual and which enable it to cope more suc- 
 cessfully with its fellows. The law of the survival of the fittest 
 in the battle for life every one is ready to recognize when they see 
 a hand-to-hand encounter between two pugnacious individuals ; the 
 stronger, other things being equal, will surely overcome the weaker. 
 
Natural Selection. 79 
 
 Nor will any father or mother question the truth of the law of 
 " the hereditary transmission of peculiarities, both physical and 
 mental," for they have abundant opportunity of verifying it every 
 day of their lives in their own children. 
 
 Now, those changes of structure called " accidental variations " 
 are the result of inherent tendency on the part of the organism to 
 vary, and of the influence of external conditions. In those in- 
 stances where the innate tendency to vary is seconded or assisted 
 by external conditions, the variations will be fostered and perpetu- 
 ated ; but if the external conditions are not favorable, then the 
 tendency to vary will not be assisted, and the organism will retro- 
 grade, and, in time, disappear. Thus we see that to inherent 
 tendencies to vary, and the influence of the environing circum- 
 stances, must be attributed all the diversity of animated creation. 
 The one is the complement of the other. 
 
 The two primary laws, then, upon which natural selection rests, 
 may be thus formulated : 
 
 1st. The existence of an inherent tendency on the part of all organ- 
 isms to vary. 
 2cL The influence of the environment permitting and determining 
 the character of these variations. 
 
 These two primary laws are supplemented by the law of heredity, 
 which tends to transmit the variations which arise, and by the law 
 of the survival of the fittest in the battle for life by adaptation to ex- 
 ternal conditions. This latter is a necessary outcome of the second 
 primary law. 
 
 Every one is prepared to admit that the external conditions of 
 life, such as climate, food, and soil, are subject to changes, not only 
 of a temporary but of a permanent character. Now, organisms 
 inhabiting a country where such changes are in progress must 
 either change with the external conditions, in order to adapt them- 
 selves to the changed state of affairs, or they must be seriously in- 
 jured and finally exterminated. It becomes, therefore, a matter of 
 the first importance to the organism to keep the Equilibrium which 
 subsists between itself and its external conditions. The natural 
 result will be that those variations in the individual which best 
 enable it to restore the equilibrium disturbed by external changes, 
 will be fostered and perpetuated. Now, if these external changes 
 are of such a nature as to favor the higher developmental tendencies 
 
80 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 of the individual, then development will result; but if these 
 changes are opposed to such developmental tendencies, then the or- 
 ganism must retrograde to restore the equilibrium, or it must remove 
 to some more favorable territory, or it must Perish.* 
 
 Now, it must not be forgotten that the external world has itself 
 a tendency to fit itself for the reception of higher and higher life 
 impressed upon it in the beginning, and hence, the developmental 
 tendencies of the individual have been, in the long run, assisted 
 by the developmental tendencies inherent in the constitution of 
 the Globe, f In the beginning it prepared itself for the reception 
 of life, and brought it forth when the fitting time came. With 
 the advent of the organic world, another factor came into play, and 
 assisted the inorganic elements and forces in preparing the world 
 as an abode for higher life. Every organism, reacts upon its envi- 
 ronment and tends to improve it, thereby enabling the environment 
 to encourage the development of a still higher organism.% 
 
 The developing tendencies have continued in operation up to 
 the present time, and, as a natural result, have been followed by 
 the development of higher and higher life. 
 
 It is true that there are local and individual exceptions to this 
 onward course of development. Volcanic action, earthquakes, 
 floods, and tempests, &c, have rendered parts of the earth uninhab- 
 itable. But taking into consideration all these local checks, I do 
 not think that any rational man will deny that the external world 
 is still developing, and fitting itself more completely as an abode 
 for animated nature. Nor will any rational man deny that the 
 
 * It must not be overlooked when we consider what constitute external 
 conditions, that with reference to animals, the vegetable world is an external 
 condition ; and, that, with reference to plants, the animal world is an external 
 condition. Climate, soil, &c, are of course external to both. 
 
 t The various agencies at work in the inorganic world preparing the Grlobe for 
 higher life are numerous and powerful. The disintegration of rocks and lev- 
 eling down of mountain ranges by torrent and flood, and the upheaval of land 
 above the waters, increase the total area of habitable space for higher life. 
 
 | The law "that organisms are molded in a degree by their habitat," must 
 not blind us to the existence of the complementary law that " the habitat is 
 also in a measure molded by the organism." Many ocean islands owe their 
 origin to the coral polyp ; the moss and lichen may prepare a soil which will 
 enable the monarch of the forest to strike its roots. 
 
 
Natural Selection. 81 
 
 human race is also advancing, both in numbers and material pros- 
 perity ; now, man is the acme and crown of terrestrial creation, 
 and, in his person, animated nature is keeping equal pace with the 
 development of the external world. Nay, man is no longer in 
 swaddling bands, but he has wrenched the scepter from the hand 
 of nature, and she, recognizing the fitness of things, acknowledges 
 his superior power and becomes his willing slave, furthering his 
 efforts to make the earth a fitting abode for rational beings. 
 
 The low organisms which still abound, in spite of the develop- 
 mental tendencies inherent in all organized matter, have never 
 met with the proper external conditions necessary to enable these 
 tendencies to develop, hence they have remained stagnant or even 
 retrograded. 
 
 We will now illustrate the truth of the laws governing natural 
 selection and examine into the method of their action. 
 
 It is a recognized fact that all of our domestic animals have 
 originated from wild species. Under the influence of man's se- 
 lective power, the breeds have been improved and sometimes com- 
 pletely changed. 
 
 Thus, Mr. Darwin, after a long series of observations, has given 
 satisfactory evidence that all of our domestic pigeons are descended 
 from the wild rock pigeon, (columba livia.) Every agriculturist 
 improves his crops by selecting the best for seeding, and every 
 stock-raiser does the same with his cattle, sheep, and horses. Now, 
 what man does on a small scale nature does on a large scale, but 
 the process is the same in both cases. 
 
 As a striking illustration of the power of selection in modifying 
 the organism, the new breed of sheep established by a Massachu- 
 setts farmer may be quoted. In the year 1791, a Mr. Wright had 
 a flock of sheep, consisting of a ram and some twelve ewes. At 
 the breeding time one of the ewes gave birth to a very singularly- 
 formed male lamb ; it had a very long body, and very short legs. 
 When this lamb attained maturity, it occurred to Mr. Wright to 
 try an experiment. He killed his old ram and bred entirely from 
 the new. The result was that this peculiarity was transmitted in 
 several instances, and, by continuing this selective process, he suc- 
 ceeded in establishing a breed of short-legged sheep. As this new 
 breed possessed the great advantage of not being able to jump 
 6 
 
82 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 fencing, on account of the shortness of their legs, it became quite 
 popular in that section of the State.* 
 
 Mr. Darwin has furnished numerous examples of this selective 
 process in nature, both in the animal and vegetable world. 
 
 The use and non-use of parts is a powerful factor in the selective 
 process. The case of the Paris amphibians, which escaped from 
 their confinement and entirely lost their gills, is a good illustra- 
 tration of this. Here the gills disappeared for want of use, whilst 
 the lungs became more perfectly developed on account of the in- 
 creased use to which they were put. The imperfect eye of the 
 mole is another striking illustration. The rudimentary muscles 
 of the human ear is another. Every one knows that these muscles 
 are well developed in nearly all the lower animals, where they 
 subserve the important purpose of shaping the form of the external 
 ear for the reception of sound. 
 
 All animals prick up their ears when excited, and this power is 
 possessed in a greater degree by those creatures which, on account 
 of weakness, place their safety in flight when attacked, or in those 
 which live by prey. 
 
 As we approach the higher animals, these muscles become more 
 and more rudimentary, and when we reach man we find them so 
 insignificant that they are no longer of any use. Every one is 
 familiar with the physiological fact that disused muscles atrophy or 
 diminish, whilst the more they are used the greater is their devel- 
 opment. May we not attribute the rudimentary wings of the pen- 
 guin to habitual disuse ? These creatures inhabit lonely parts of 
 lonely sections of the world, and flight from danger is with them 
 a rare necessity. The long disuse of the wing resulted in their 
 retrograding as appendages of flight. On the other hand, we find 
 the ostrich occupying sections of the world where danger from 
 enemies is great ; we might expect, therefore, that this bird would 
 have very exalted powers of flight. But it must be remembered 
 that the ostrich occupies a desert region, where food is not abun- 
 dant ; now the quantity of food- necessary for a bird of flight of 
 the size of the ostrich would be enormous, much more than he can 
 command. The legs of the bird are, therefore, used more than 
 the wings, and, consequently, undergo enormous development, 
 
 * This breed subsequently became unpopular and was allowed to die out. 
 
Natural Selection. 83 
 
 whilst the wings, from want of use, almost disappear. Here, then, 
 we have two examples, drawn from diametrically opposite condi- 
 tions, where the resultant of external forces has produced a like 
 effect in the same organ. In the one case, however, the leg de- 
 velopment makes up for the wing degradation, and is. indirectly, 
 the result of deficient food. Thus, the presence of danger and 
 deficient food supply have assisted in making the ostrich what he 
 is. I say assisted, for there were doubtless many other causes at 
 work also. 
 
 We will now endeavor to illustrate the working of the law "of 
 the survival of the fittest in the struggle for life," which is one of 
 the most important sub-factors in the process of natural selection. 
 
 Let us take a specified area of ground, and let us suppose that 
 this area is capable of bringing to maturity a certain number of 
 plants, and no more. Now, we will scatter over this area ten 
 times the quantity of seed which would be necessary to fill the 
 allotted space. It is evident that only one seed out of ten can 
 possibly reach its full development, and, if we consider any indi- 
 vidual seed, there are exactly nine chances against its coming to 
 maturity. Now, in a case like this, what happens ? 
 
 A struggle for existence commences at once, and those seeds 
 which are favored in any way whatsoever have the best chance 
 for surviving. The most trifling circumstances — a few rain-drops 
 more or less, the presence of a little clod which might interfere 
 with growth, or anything which would give one seed a hair's- 
 breadth advantage over another — would determine its selection.* 
 
 Now, this fight for life is constantly being waged throughout 
 nature's wide field, and it is by the survival of the fittest that she 
 makes her selection. However slight an advantage may be, or 
 however acquired, nature selects that advantage and assists in per- 
 petuating it. The hypothetical illustration just made use of will 
 enable us to appreciate that statement of Mr. Darwin which sums 
 up in a nutshell his greatest contribution to the theory of natural 
 selection. 
 
 * The relation existing between population and food-supply, formulated by 
 Malthus, here comes into play. By the premises of our proposition, only suf- 
 ficient nourishment exists to bring to perfection a given number of plants — all 
 beyond that number must perish. This truth recommends itself so strongly 
 to the understanding that it may be regarded in the light of an axiom. 
 
• 84 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 He says, (Origin of Species, page 168 :) "As natural selection 
 acts solely by the preservation of profitable modifications, each 
 new form will tend, in a fully-stocked country, to take the place 
 of, and finally to exterminate, its own less-improved parent form 
 and other less-improved forms with which it comes into competi- 
 tion. Thus extinction and natural selection go hand in hand. Hence, 
 if we look at each species as descended from some other unknown 
 form, both the parent and all the transitional varieties will gener- 
 ally have been exterminated by the very process of the formation 
 and perfection of the new form." 
 
 To assist the mind in grasping the ideas here conveyed, the at- 
 tention of the reader is invited to the following diagrams, which 
 will serve to illustrate how one species might replace another in a 
 given territory, under the influence of variations perpetuated by 
 natural selection. He will also be able to appreciate the great 
 truth that the very conditions which insure the growth of a new 
 species will certainly tend to prove fatal to the old, that the new 
 species can only grow at the expense of the old, and that the growth 
 of the one presupposes the decadence of the other. This follows 
 as a natural result of the law of Malthus just referred to. Thus 
 we are. enabled to give a satisfactory explanation of the almost en- 
 tire absence of connecting links between great natural groups. 
 
 In cut 1 we have a so-called species, consisting of seven varie- 
 ties, occupying a given territory where external conditions, prov- 
 ing favorable, have determined its abode. We will suppose that 
 this group of animals, owing to the long existing equilibrium of 
 external conditions, has reached its maximum number. 
 
 We will now suppose that a slight change of climate or food- 
 supply takes place, and that two of the varieties attain a slight ad- 
 vantage over the others by adapting themselves a little better to 
 the changed conditions. Now, the causes which first led to this 
 slight advantage will tend to make these favored varieties still 
 more predominant, and, by the conditions of the law governing 
 population, in proportion as these varieties increase, the others 
 must diminish, either by seeking a new abode, or by adapting 
 themselves to other conditions in which they avoid competition, 
 or they must gradually die out. In cut 2 we see the predominant 
 varieties growing at the expense of the others, and they have 
 monopolized the greater part of the available territory. Whilst 
 
Natural Selection. 
 
 85 
 
 this is going on, variations occur in certain indidivuals of the two 
 
 predominant varieties, and these 
 variations are of such a nature as 
 to give them an advantage over 
 the other members of the pre- 
 dominant varieties, (we are sup- 
 plying a gradual but continuous 
 change of external conditions,) 
 the result will be that a number 
 of sub-varieties will arise. Let 
 cut 3 represent this state of things. 
 Seven sub-varieties have budded 
 from each of the predominant 
 varieties, whilst the old varieties 
 have been further reduced in size, 
 owing to the disadvantageous 
 competition with which they have 
 had to contend. The fourteen sub- 
 varieties continue to increase by 
 the very conditions which first set 
 them going, and they now materi- 
 ally encroach on the parent pre- 
 dominant varieties, which, at the 
 same time, begin to diminish. Cut 
 ■4 shows this condition of affairs. 
 Of the old varieties, three have 
 entirely disappeared, and the two 
 remaining are very much reduced. 
 The old predominant varieties 
 are also much reduced, whilst the 
 sub-varieties are increasing in im- 
 portance. 
 
 In cut 5 the two old varieties 
 which remained have disappeared, 
 and the old predominant varieties 
 are reduced to almost nothing. 
 In cut 6 we see the transforma- 
 tion completed, the last remaining members of the predominant 
 variety have disappeared, and we have two entire new species, 
 
 4-^ 
 
 T 
 
86 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 consisting of seven varieties each, in the place of the old original 
 species. 
 
 Now, the length of time required to bring about such a trans- 
 formation would depend upon the stability of the external condi- 
 tions. Nor must we suppose that the new species would neces- 
 sarily occupy a higher plane of development, for this would 
 depend upon the nature of the changes in the external conditions. 
 If these were favorable to a higher development, the new species 
 would also be higher ; but, on the other hand, if the external con- 
 ditions were not of such a character, the new species would be de- 
 graded in the scale of being. If the external conditions should 
 continue to degenerate, the resulting new species would occupy a 
 still lower plane ; and the time might arrive when the territory 
 might become entirely unfit as an abode for organic life ; organic 
 life would then necessarily disappear. 
 
 Nor does this fact in any way militate against the existence of 
 inherent tendencies toward a higher state of being on the part of the 
 individuals concerned ; it only shows that these higher tendencies 
 require higher conditions for their expansion, and, if these higher 
 conditions are not forthcoming, the individual cannot develop into 
 a higher form in spite of the innate tendency so to do. Thus it 
 will be seen that the external conditions are as much of a neces- 
 sity to higher development as the inherent tendencies themselves. 
 
 What we have shown taking place in a small group or species, 
 may, by the continuous operation of the same causes, give rise to 
 new genera, new orders, and new classes, and new grand divisions. 
 
 Let us broaden our limited territory until we have compassed 
 the habitable world, and let us enlarge our small group to the em- 
 bracing of the whole animal kingdom ; the law of Malthus gov- 
 erning population will still remain in operation, and the laws of 
 natural selection will still obtain. Now, the twig with its seven 
 leaves, which we have made to represent a species with its vari- 
 eties, expands into the foliage of a mighty teee, whose trunk and 
 branches, made up of preceding forms, have long since perished, 
 and whose remains lie buried in Mother Earth whence they sprung. 
 If the reader has followed the argument, he will at once appre- 
 ciate the fact that the growth of the foliage of the tree depends 
 upon the death of its branches, {upon the extinction of the parent 
 forms which gave birth to existing life;) and, by the very conditions 
 
Xatural Selection. 
 
 87 
 
 of the tree's existence, he would not expect to find any transitional 
 living forms beyond the smallest group or species. 
 
 Thus, the individuals constituting a variety are most nearly alike, 
 but when we compare two typical individuals of two different va- 
 rieties belonging to the same species, we find a marked divergence 
 of structure, though the two varieties may run into one another 
 by insensible gradations, as is frequently the case. Now, if we 
 compare two individuals belonging to two more widely separated 
 groups, called species, this divergence of character is still more 
 marked, and we also find the transition between these two greater 
 groups more abrupt. This divergence becomes greater and greater 
 as we recede from the variety, and fewer and fewer do the transi- 
 tional forms, or connecting links, become. This will be better 
 understood by reference 
 to the diagram, where 
 the leaf represents the 
 variety, the smallest 
 clump of leaves the spe- 
 cies, and the next in 
 size the genus, next the 
 order. Now, we would 
 naturally look for great- 
 er similarity of struc- 
 ture, and more numer- 
 ous transitional forms, 
 among the members of 
 varieties comprising a 
 species than we would 
 among members of different species. 
 
 These resemblances and connecting links would be further les- 
 sened between genera, still less between orders, &c. Keeping in 
 mind the great fact that the sub-varieties (new leaves) arise from 
 the old varieties (old leaves) by a budding process, and grow at 
 their expense, the reader will no longer have any difficulty in ap- 
 preciating the great truth that the parent forms must retrograde as 
 the new forms develop — as the new leaves grow, the old fade 
 away, and, finally, fall from the tree, and their remains constitute 
 the fossil forms which strew the bosom of Mother Earth. Hence, 
 transitional living forms are not to be expected beyond the smallest 
 
88 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 group of leaves or species. He may justly expect to find some 
 transitional fossil forms, and, later on, the evidence so furnished 
 will be examined. 
 
 As we contemplate this majestic tree, whose wide-spreading 
 foliage overshadows the whole Earth, the thought that it required 
 fitting soil for its growth at once occurs to us. In other words, 
 organic life could not have developed into higher forms, in spite 
 of the existence of inherent tendencies, unless external conditions 
 had been favorable to such development. As well might we ex- 
 pect the acorn, thrown upon the barren sands, to bring forth the 
 sturdy oak. Within the narrow compass of its seed the tree lies, 
 potentially, but it requires favorable conditions to bring it to ma- 
 turity. Hence, organic development into a higher state of being 
 depends upon, 
 
 1. The inherent tendencies on the part of the individual to de- 
 
 velop into a higher form of being, and, 
 
 2. The inherent tendencies in the globe to fit itself for the re- 
 
 ception of this higher form of life. 
 
 Under the influence of these two great laws, which, for want of 
 a deeper knowledge of secondary laws, we can only define as de- 
 crees of Almighty Power, the onward march will not cease until 
 the world has fulfilled the great mission set apart for it by the Great 
 Designer. The progress of organic life as a whole has merged 
 itself into the progress of man, who is its great representative. 
 
 As man increases in power and wisdom, external nature assumes 
 more and more the place of a servant, and no longer exercises, in 
 the same degree, those powers of selection which, prior to man's 
 appearance, she wielded with such stupendous effect. Just in pro- 
 portion as man advances, Artificial Selection takes the place of 
 Natural Selection, and he stamps the seal of his will more and 
 more upon the lower creation. The wild animals, not suitable for 
 domestication, disappear before his advancing footsteps, and the 
 vegetable kingdom also acknowledges his superior power, and 
 molds itself according to his dictates.* 
 
 * In the widest sense, man is a part of nature, and, in the same sense, all 
 his acts are natural acts. The continued Evolution of the world under his 
 dominion is, therefore, as much a natural process as it was before, but we are 
 forced to make the distinction in order not to confound the workings of Na- 
 ture expressed through him and the workings of Nature expressed through 
 agencies external to him. 
 
Artificial Selection. 89 
 
 The time will inevitably come when every foot of Earth fitted 
 for Man's habitation will be occupied by him, and, as a natural 
 result, those animals and plants which are not subservient to his 
 well-being will disappear. The dividing lines between natural 
 groups will thus broaden with man's advance, by the extermina- 
 tion of intervening species and genera. The time is not far dis- 
 tant, comparatively speaking, when the existing gap between man 
 and the lower creation will be immeasurably widened by the de- 
 struction of all the higher apes. 
 
 The Feline tribe, which now numbers among its members the 
 lion and the tiger, monarchs of the forest, will have its sole repre- 
 sentative in the pet of the household ; and its close affinity to the 
 fierce tyrants of the animal kingdom will become a matter of tra- 
 dition. Such will be the fate of all the members of the lower crea- 
 tion if brought into competition with man. They must either be- 
 come his servants and do his bidding, or they must perish.* 
 
 The absence of transitional living forms has been one of the 
 chief arguments brought forward by the opponents of Evolution ; 
 with how much better show of reason will the opponent of the 
 doctrine be able to urge this same argument five hundred or a 
 thousand years hence? 
 
 When the opponent of Evolution succeeds in ridding himself of 
 the notion of the linear progression of all living forms, and accus- 
 toms himself to represent nature as a tree with many diverging 
 branches, then the difficulty, based upon the absence of connecting- 
 links, will disappear. According to his conception of Evolution, 
 he is quite justified in expecting a regular gradation of living ani- 
 mals connecting reptiles with birds, birds with the lower mam- 
 malia, and so on, up to man in a regular and unbroken series of 
 imperceptibly modified individual forms. 
 
 Under the influence of these erroneous notions, the most absurd 
 questions have been asked, and the most puerile statements have 
 been made by the most intelligent men. 
 
 * At the present rate of increase in population, another thousand years will 
 witness the extermination of all the higher wild animals, and a large part of 
 the less important which are not domesticated. 
 
90 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Chapter V. 
 
 Arguments for Evolution Drawn from Paleontology. . 
 
 Ye who study with reverential awe the writing of the inspired page, treat 
 not with indifference nor disdain the teachings of the characters engraved on 
 the rock-ribbed Earth by the same Divine Hand. 
 
 Having passed in review some of the chief facts presented to us 
 by living nature, we will now consider the evidence which Geology 
 and Paleontology supply in favor of the doctrine of Evolution. 
 
 According to the theory which has been set forth in the preced- 
 ing pages, transitional living forms are not to be looked for, but 
 we should expect to find some transitional fossil forms ; and these 
 we do find. 
 
 That they are not more numerous is because of our limited 
 knowledge of the crust of the Earth, and the destructive influence 
 of time upon these buried remains. As our acquaintance with 
 the various strata increases, more and more evidence is brought to 
 light. The record of the Earth's history, written on the face of 
 the rocks, is not entirely obliterated by time's eroding hand ; here 
 and there a detached fragment has been discovered and deciphered, 
 and enough has already been found to put beyond reasonable 
 doubt the general tenor of the whole. Just as the Philologist 
 searches among the remains of dead languages to seek the origin 
 of existing tongues, so the Paleontologist delves into the bosom of 
 the Earth to find the remains of that life from which existing life 
 has sprung. 
 
 The earth which we inhabit may be compared to a hollow globe, 
 one yard in diameter, with sides less than a half inch in thickness, 
 filled with a molten mass. The thickness of the shell of such a 
 globe probably bears about the same proportion to the diameter 
 that the crust of the earth does to its diameter.' 55 ' Of this shell, 
 
 * Notwithstanding the opinion of some scientific men to the contrary, there 
 is hardly a reasonable doubt that the central parts of the earth are in a molten 
 condition. 
 
Paleontology. 91 
 
 about fifteen miles have been explored by the geologist. Lofty 
 mountains, croppings of strata, and deep mines are the means which 
 he makes use of to obtain a knowledge of the earth's crust. The 
 fossil remains which lie scattered here and there in these various 
 strata are the records which nature has preserved, and the study 
 of these records demonstrates the great truth that life on the globe 
 has been gradual and progressive. As we descend the scale of 
 the strata, the type of life becomes lower, and the higher animals 
 disappear and are replaced by those of a more degraded organiza- 
 tion, and finally, when the lowest rocks that have yet been exam- 
 ined are reached, the only trace of life is the Eozoon Canadense? 
 an animal belonging to the lowest type of life. But there must 
 have been a time when no life existed, and this little creature must 
 have been preceded by many generations of still lower organisms? 
 but which have left no trace behind them. Had this lowly rep- 
 resentative of the animal kingdom not possessed a shell, it also 
 would have perished, and the fact that life existed on the globe at 
 that remote period would only have been a matter of conjecture. 
 
 The history of the earth's crust, in its relation to life, may be 
 divided into two great periods — the azoic and the zoic. 
 
 The azoic,* or period of no life, extends from the time when 
 the earth, separated from its parent, assumed an independent ex- 
 istence up to the appearance of life. It therefore embraces that 
 stage of its history during which it was fitting itself for the recep- 
 tion of life, and this is, by far, the longest period of its history. 
 
 The zoic,f or life period, extends from the first appearance of 
 life up to the present. With reference to the forms of life which 
 came into being at successive epochs, the zoic period may be 
 divided into aeven ages, each of which is distinguished by the ap- 
 pearance of a higher type of life. 
 
 First. — There was first an age in which only the lowest forms 
 of life existed, probably very similar to existing protozoa. 
 
 The only remains of the later period of this early life yet found 
 is the delicate shell of the Eozoon Canadense, which belongs to the 
 same class as existing foraminifera, and which was discovered some 
 years ago in the Laurentian strata of Canada. These rocks belong 
 
 * Azoic, from Gr. a, without ; and zee, life. 
 f Zoic, from Gr. zee, life. 
 
92 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 to the oldest group yet investigated by the geologist. The fora- 
 minifera,* though classed with the monera, the lowest existing 
 type of animal life, are endowed with a shelly covering, pierced 
 with numerous minute holes through which the soft creature; 
 which is nothing more than a uniform mass of protoplasm, pro- 
 jects its improvised arms for the purposes of feeding and propelling 
 itself, f 
 
 At this remote period, the waters must have literally swarmed 
 with lowly organized life, both animal and vegetable. But the 
 great majority of these organisms, being soft and perishable, have 
 left no records in the rocks. Such would have been the fate of 
 the Eozoon Canadense had it not possessed a shelly envelope. We, 
 therefore, find that the geological record jumps suddenly from this 
 low Eozoon Canadense to corals, shell fish, and articulate animals, 
 and the appearance of these creatures ushers in the 
 
 Second Age. — During this period, the four lower grand divisions 
 of the animal kingdom, Protozoa, Coelenterala, Mollusca, and Annu. 
 losa, were pretty well represented, and sea weeds abounded. As 
 yet there was no land life, and the Annulosa just referred to be- 
 longed to the water species only. This age has received the name 
 Silurian, from a locality in Wales, where the rocks in which these 
 fossils were found were first carefully studied. The latter part of 
 this period is marked by the appearance of fish, and this ushers 
 in the 
 
 Third Age, or Age of Fishes. — Besides the animals above named, 
 the waters now teem with fish. The land is being gradually ele- 
 vated above the waters, and terrestrial life, both vegetable and ani- 
 mal, begins to make its appearance. The animal life is confined 
 to insects. 
 
 This age has received the name Devonian, from the county 
 Devon, England, where these fossil strata abound. 
 
 * "In some forms of the foraminifera, the improvised arms or pseudopodia 
 are protruded from only one end of the body, the rest of which is cut off from 
 the exterior by the skeleton, as in G-romidae, &c." — Huxley. 
 
 t " The typical monera consist of a particle of gelatinous protoplasm, in which 
 no nucleus, contractile vacuole, or other definite structure, is visible; and 
 which, at most, presents a separation into an outer, more clear, and denser 
 layer, the ectosarc; and an inner, more granular and fluid matter, the endo- 
 sarc. " — Huxley. 
 
Paleontology. 93 
 
 Fourth. — There was then an age when the continents, which 
 were in process of formation during the latter part of the preced- 
 ing period, now increased rapidly, and were covered with a rank 
 vegetation, in which palms, tree-ferns, and other endogens held 
 the chief place. It was during this age that the immense coal de- 
 posits were formed, and hence it has received the name Carbonifer- 
 ous, or age of coal plants. Amphibians and the lower Reptiles 
 now make their appearance. The gradual development of land 
 life ushers in the 
 
 Fifth Age. — Reptile life now abounded, and the rocks of the 
 period are so rich in their remains that this age has received the 
 name Reptilian. Birds now make their appearance, and become 
 very numerous toward the latter part of the period. The lower 
 mammalia, represented by the Marsupials, also begin to appear 
 during the latter part of this age, and their advent ushers in the 
 
 Sixth Age, or Age of Mammals. — During this period, the lower 
 creation reaches its acme of development, and the forests swarm 
 with huge monsters, among which the mastodon held the most 
 conspicuous place. Like the huge reptiles of the preceding age, 
 these giants of the animal kingdom gradually grew less, and some 
 of the higher mammalia developed into apes, and these into still 
 higher forms. The man-like ape now receives a living soul, and 
 the 
 
 Seventh Age, or Age of Man, (burns upon creation. — And now a 
 change comes over the face of nature, and man, as the most exalted 
 of all created things, assumes his place at the head of Creation. 
 Under the quickening influence of the spiritual life breathed into 
 him, the animal part of his nature has been gradually softened 
 and made subservient to the higher nature united with it, and this 
 progress will not cease until the lower is completely subjugated, 
 and the spiritual part of his being will then reign untrammeled. 
 
 For convenience of study, these seven ages may be grouped 
 under three grand divisions or times : 
 
 I. Primary or Paleozoic Time, (Gr. Palaios, ancient ; and Zas, life,) 
 which embraces, 
 
 (1.) The age of Protozoa, or Laurentian age. 
 
 (2.) The age of Mollusks, or Silurian age. 
 
 (3.) The age of Fishes, or Devonian age. 
 
 (4.) The age of Coal plants, or Carboniferous age. 
 
94 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 on 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 N 
 
 POST-TERTIARY AND RECENT, ERA OF MAN. 
 
 Placental mammals 
 abundant. 
 
 First placental mam- 
 mals. 
 
 Commencement of 
 low mammals (mar- 
 supials.) Birds and 
 Reptiles abundant. 
 
 First Reptiles and Am- 
 carboniferous/ phibians. 
 
 Fish very abundant. 
 
 First Fish, and begin- 
 ning of land life, 
 both animal and 
 vegetable. 
 
 Annulosa, (insects, 
 worms, crabs, &c.) 
 Mollusca, (shellfish, 
 &c.) Coelenterata, 
 (corals,jellyfish,&;c.) 
 
 Protozoa, (first ani- 
 mals,) and Proto- 
 phyta, (first plants.) 
 The only fossil thus 
 far found is the 
 Eozoon Canadense. 
 
 Fig. 4. An ideal section of the Earth's crust, showing the gradual 
 ascent of Life. 
 
Paleontology. 95 
 
 II. Secondary, or Mesozoic Time, (Gr. Mesos, middle; and Zee, 
 
 life,) embracing the age of Reptiles and Birds. 
 
 III. Tertiary, or Cenozoic Time, (Gr. Kainos, recent ; and Zee, life,) 
 which includes the age of Mammals and the age of Man. 
 
 Fig. 4 represents an ideal section of the crust of the Earth, in 
 which these divisions may be more conveniently studied. 
 
 It will be observed that animal life has made its appearance on 
 the globe by a gradual process of development from the lowest to 
 the highest forms. As we ascend the scale of the strata, higher 
 and higher life makes its appearance, until the highest of all, man 
 himself, is reached. 
 
 Comparing existing life with that of the past, it is found that 
 many of these forms are now extinct. Thus, of all the species of 
 fish heretofore discovered in the rocks of the Devonian age not 
 one belongs to existing species. Among the ancient reptiles were 
 found the Icthyosauria, Pleiosauria, Pterosauria, and Dinosauna. 
 None of these animals have representatives among the living. 
 
 These examples might be multiplied indefinitely, but the few 
 cases cited will serve to teach us that, from the study of the Earth's 
 strata, we may draw two very important conclusions. 
 
 1. That the Earth, and the Life on its surface, have not always 
 been as they are now. 
 
 2. That the type of life has gradually advanced from the lowest 
 to the highest, and that this advance has not been brought about 
 by sudden acts of Creation, but that the creative process has been 
 continuous, by the Evolution of preexisting forms. 
 
 It has already been shown that we are not to expect transitional 
 living forms beyond the smallest group or species, that by the very 
 process of Evolution these forms would necessarily be extermi- 
 nated ; but it does follow that we are to look for transitional fossil 
 forms, and the evidence so furnished will now be adduced. Be- 
 fore doing so, however, it is necessary to call the attention of the 
 reader to two very important facts : first, the imperfection of the 
 geological record, and, second, the limited area which has been ex- 
 plored by the Geologist. 
 
 No one will deny but that a very insignificant portion of the 
 Earth's crust has been examined by man. Here and there a hole 
 has been bored and a few remains exhumed, or the miner, in pur- 
 suit of treasure, has discovered a few scattered fragments. The 
 
96 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 alluvial deposits of great rivers have furnished no small proportion 
 of the remains which fill our museums. But, granting that it were 
 possible for man to make a thorough exploration of the strata of 
 the Earth, what proportion of fossil remains, as compared with the 
 life existing at the time those remains were deposited, would he 
 expect to find? Let any one calculate the chances of a dead 
 animal, thrown hap-hazard on a plain or in the bed of a river, 
 leaving any fossil remains behind it. The destructive agencies of 
 nature, which are even now so potent in obliterating all traces of 
 organic remains, were infinitely more active and powerful during 
 geologic time. Natural forces then displayed themselves on a 
 scale of grandeur of which we cannot now form the faintest con- 
 ception. But, notwithstanding the limited area explored, and the 
 imperfection of the record, the researches of the Geologist have 
 brought to light evidence which puts the doctrine of Evolution 
 beyond the pale of reasonable doubt. 
 
 If any ordinarily intelligent man were asked to name two groups 
 of animals which he thought were most widely separated from one 
 another in organic structure, he would be as likely to mention 
 Birds and Reptiles as any other. For what two creatures could be 
 more distinct than, say, the alligator and the common barn-yard 
 fowl? Yet, notwithstanding the immense difference in structure, 
 there is the strongest evidence in favor of the belief that the bird- 
 form of animal is derived from the Reptilian form, of which we 
 have assumed the alligator to be the type, by insensible gradations. 
 
 The chief characteristics of living birds are familiar to all. They 
 are feathered ; they possess wings, and the great majority can fly, 
 though in some, as in the Penguin and Ostrich, the wings are rudi- 
 mentary and insufficient for flight ; their jaws are toothless, a 
 roughened condition of the mandible taking the place of teeth ; 
 they walk on two feet ; their bones are hollow, to unite the greatest 
 strength with the least weight, and the bones from which the tail 
 feathers are given off are glued into a mass. Such are some of 
 the superficial points with which most intelligent persons are ac- 
 quainted. 
 
 Living reptiles differ more widely among themselves than living 
 birds. Thus the snake, lizard, alligator, and turtle are all classed 
 under reptiles. The snake runs into the lizard by almost insen- 
 sible gradations, as every one has had occasion to observe who has 
 
Paleontology. 97 
 
 ever visited a zoological garden where a variety of snakes and 
 lizards are kept. The lizard and the alligator are more widely 
 separated, but Paleontology brings them close together. The alli- 
 gator and the tortoise are still more widely distinct in their ap- 
 pearance. 
 
 Of these various reptilian forms, we will select that of the alli- 
 gator as being the most typical. The chief superficial character- 
 istics of this typical living reptile are, an elongated body covered 
 with a horny skin, resembling a coat of mail, which renders him 
 almost invulnerable ; four legs, which are so placed that the ani- 
 mal's natural position is prone upon the belly, the legs being better 
 adapted for swimming and crawling than for walking ; its tail is 
 elongated, tapering to a point ; it has enormous jaws filled with 
 strong teeth, which are placed in distinct sockets. Whilst the 
 greatest possible difference exists between the bird and the alliga- 
 tor in external appearance, yet in internal organization they resem- 
 ble closely, particularly in the structure of the digestive and re- 
 productive organs. The vascular apparatus differs from that of 
 the bird in being so arranged as to insure a mixture of pure and 
 impure blood in the general circulation.* Both birds and reptiles 
 are oviparous; f but, in the case of birds, the eggs are hatched by 
 the warmth of the mother's body, whilst with reptiles the heat of 
 the sun perforins the same office. Notwithstanding the contrast 
 presented by living birds and living reptiles, the researches of the 
 Paleontologist afford us demonstrative proof that birds and rep- 
 tiles were once closely united, and that the one was derived from 
 the other by insensible gradations of form. Thus, fossil remains 
 of birds have been found where the tail bones are elongated, not 
 unlike the reptile, and where the wing bones terminated in true 
 claws. Such a bird was the Arehaeopteryx, first discovered in the 
 Solenhofen slates of Germany. Again, in the Cretaceous rocks of 
 the Western States, Professor Marsh has discovered the remains of 
 
 * In birds the heart consists of four cavities, while in reptiles there are but 
 three; the crocodile family, however, offers an exception to this rule, and in 
 them the heart consists of four complete cavities, but a communication exists 
 between the pulmonary artery and aorta, which allows a certain proportion of 
 impure blood to gain access to the general circulation. 
 
 fin some reptiles the egg is retained in the oviduct until the young is 
 hatched; these are ovo-viviparous. 
 7 
 
98 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 birds which possessed true teeth. Such are the Hesperornis Regalis 
 and the Icthyornis Dispar. In the former the teeth are arranged 
 in a groove, whilst in the latter they are placed in distinct sockets. 
 Professor Huxley, commenting upon these remains, says : " Before 
 the discovery of Hesperornis, the definition of the class aves, based 
 upon our knowledge of existing birds, might have been extended 
 to all birds ; it might have been said that the absence of teeth was 
 characteristic of the class birds ; but the discovery of an animal 
 which, in every part of its skeleton, closely agrees with existing 
 birds, and yet possesses teeth, shows that there were ancient birds 
 which, in respect of possessing teeth, approach reptiles more nearly 
 than existing birds, and, to that extent, diminishes the hiatus be- 
 tween the two classes." "In the Archaeopteryx, the upper arm 
 bone is like that of a bird ; and the two bones of the forearm are 
 more or less like those of a bird, but the fingers are not bound to- 
 gether — they are free — what their number may have been is un- 
 certain ; but several, if not all of them, were terminated by strong 
 curved claws, not like such as are sometimes found in birds, but 
 such as reptiles possess ; so that in the Archaeopteryx we have an 
 animal, which, to a certain extent, occupies a midway place be- 
 tween a bird and a reptile. It is a bird so far. as its foot and sun- 
 dry other parts of its skeleton are concerned ; it is essentially a 
 bird by its feathers ; but it is much more properly a reptile in the 
 fact that the region which represents the hand has separate bones, 
 with claws resembling those which terminate the fore limb of a 
 reptile. Moreover, it had a very long reptile-like, tail with a fringe 
 of feathers on each side ; while in all true birds hitherto known 
 the tail is relatively short, and the vertebrae which constitute its 
 skeleton are generally peculiarly modified." * 
 
 So much for fossil birds approaching the reptile type. Now 
 paleontology also discloses the fact that the ancient reptiles as- 
 sumed the bird-like form. Such are the Ccmpsognathus, an Orni- 
 thoscelidan reptile whose remains are abundant in the Mesozoic 
 rocks ; and the Pterodactyles, or flying reptiles, also numerous in 
 the same formation. There is every reason to suppose that some 
 of these Ornithoscelidan reptiles were bipedal creatures, and walked 
 on their hind legs. Fig. 5 represents a Gompsognathus restored. 
 
 * Huxley : Lectures on Evolution. 
 
Paleontology. 
 
 99 
 
 Fig. 5 
 
 The fore limbs are rudimentary, and 
 evidently of but little use in assisting 
 the animal in locomotion, but the 
 hind limbs are strongly developed 
 and are the chief agents in walking. 
 
 Mr. Huxley says : " We have had 
 to stretch the definition of the class 
 of birds so as to include birds with 
 teeth and birds with paw-like fore 
 limbs and long tails. There is no 
 evidence that ' Compsognathus ' pos- 
 sessed feathers; but if it did, it 
 would be hard indeed to say whether 
 it should be called a reptilian bird or 
 an avian reptile." 
 
 The Pterodactyles, or flying reptiles, resembled birds in the fact 
 that the ends of the jaws were often ensheathed in horny beaks, 
 and in some instances, as in the case of Plernandon, discovered by 
 Professor Marsh, there is a total absence of teeth. The bones of 
 the skeleton simulated those of birds in possessing air cavities, 
 thus rendering them lighter ; and the breast-bone was keeled, as 
 in birds and bats. The flying apparatus resembled that which we 
 see in bats at the present time, consisting of a vast web supported 
 by the fingers and united to the body. In the Pterodactylus spec- 
 tabilis, there are four fingers, three of which are hooked claws, 
 while the fourth is enormously elongated and supports the web. 
 Some of these flying monsters had a span of wing twenty feet in 
 breadth. In reviewing the evidence in favor of birds having been 
 derived from reptiles, if we cannot absolutely affirm that it is de- 
 monstrative, we are at least justified in saying that it amounts to 
 the highest degree of probability ; and we have every reason to 
 anticipate that the researches of the Paleontologist will discover 
 more conclusive evidence of the close relationship between birds 
 and reptiles. 
 
 But we are not to consider that the bird-like reptiles and the 
 reptile-like birds just mentioned are necessarily the direct progen- 
 itors of existing birds. Some of them are, in all probability, but 
 it is by no means necessary that such should be the case, for they 
 may be only side branches, or branches of side .branches, of the 
 
100 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 main branch which took its origin at the time when the Eeptilian 
 Form divided into two grand divisions, one to bring forth existing 
 reptiles and the other to produce existing birds. 
 
 The reader will be better able to understand these statements by 
 studying the diagram of the Genealogy of the Bird. 
 
 Remembering what has already been insisted upon so strongly 
 in the preceding pages concerning the development of the tree of 
 life, he will readily understand that it is impossible to construct 
 such a chart, with any approach to accuracy, without an intimate 
 acquaintance with all the various forms which lived throughout 
 the whole period. This attempt, therefore, must be regarded as 
 simply an effort to bring before the mind more clearly a general 
 idea of the theory of development, and the probable course which 
 that development pursued in the production of Existing Birds 
 and Reptiles. 
 
 In the accompanying diagram, existing birds and existing rep- 
 tiles are represented as springing from a common trunk, called the 
 Reptilian-like Form. This Reptilian Form took its origin from 
 the Amphibian-like Form, which is not represented in the figure, 
 and which will be described in another chapter. 
 
 After the division of the Reptilian Form, the left-hand branch, 
 which is destined to produce existing birds, sub-divides into three — 
 the Flying Reptile, the Bird-like Form, and the Compsognathus 
 branches. As we have already seen, this Compsognathus is more 
 of a reptile than a bird, though it resembled the birds in wal king- 
 on two legs. I have refrained from placing either flying reptiles 
 or Ornithoscelidan reptiles, represented by Compsognathus, in the 
 direct line of bird's descent, thinking it safer to assume that they 
 sprung from a common form of which no traces have yet been 
 found. The Bird form is represented dividing into the Archae- 
 opteryx, and Birds with teeth in a socket. The Icthyornis Dispar, 
 which we have seen had socket teeth, is represented as springing 
 from this branch, while the branch itself gradually merges into 
 birds which have their teeth placed in a groove. The Hesperornis 
 Regal is is the representative of this type of bird. Birds with teeth 
 placed in a groove gradually develop into those that have bony 
 processes instead of teeth, represented by the Odontopteryx found 
 in the London clay. The birds with bony processes pass insensibly 
 into those that have no such processes, and from this type existing 
 
. 
 

 HYPOTHETICAL GENEALOGY OF THE BIR 
 
EXISTING BIRDS 
 
 ODONTOPTERYX 
 
 BONY PROCESSES FOR TEETH 
 (LONDON CLAY) 
 
 ICTMYORNIS DISPAR. 
 
 TEETH IN SOCKETS 
 (CRETACEVU8 FORMATION ) 
 
Paleontology. 101 
 
 birds have sprung. Now it is not only in the range of possibility, 
 but is indeed very probable, that some of the fossil remains here 
 mentioned may be directly in the line of descent of existing birds, 
 but as this cannot be positively known, it is safer to represent them 
 as so many side branches of the main trunk. 
 
 When we consider the wide gap which now separates Birds and 
 Reptiles and contrast it with the near approach they once made to 
 one another, as shown by fossil remains, are we not justified in 
 concluding that they might have sprung from common ancestors ? 
 
 But Paleontology furnishes yet more conclusive evidence of the 
 truth of the doctrine of Evolution in the series of Equine remains 
 discovered by Professor Marsh in the Pliocene, Miocene, and 
 Eocene deposits of the West 
 
 Before proceeding any further, it will be necessary to draw the 
 attention of the reader to some points of comparative anatomy 
 which it is necessary that he should understand to enable him to 
 fully appreciate the evidence about to be brought forward. 
 
 The study of the skeleton of mammals discloses the fact that 
 there is a general plan upon which they are all built, so that a 
 knowledge of one form furnishes the key to all the rest. In Fig. 
 6 is represented the arm of a man, the foreleg of a dog, and the 
 foreleg of a horse. A glance at these figures will show the reader 
 that the horse's leg below the knee corresponds to the human hand 
 below the wrist; that the horse walks on one finger, and that the 
 hoof is the analogue of the nail of the human hand. He will also 
 observe that the two bones, Radius and Ulna, of the human fore- 
 arm correspond with the large bone in the horse situated just above 
 the knee. In man and the dog these two bones are distinctly sep- 
 arated, but in the horse they are consolidated into one, and only at 
 the upper end of the radius is the ulna to be traced. (See Pig. 7.) 
 The small bones in the knee of the horse correspond with the two 
 rows of wrist bones in man, whilst the cannon bone of the horse 
 corresponds to the Metacarpal bone in man. On either side of the 
 cannon bone are seen the splint bones. These narrow slips of bone 
 are of the utmost importance to the Evolutionist, for they are the 
 rudiments of metacarpal bones, and their existence first suggested 
 the possibility that the horse might be a descendant of some three- 
 toed ancestor. In the Pliocene and Miocene formations of certain 
 parts of Europe, the remains of the extinct Hipparion aud Anchi- 
 
102 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Fig. 6. 
 
 Arm of Man. Foreleg of Dog. 
 
 a Radius. d Metacarpal bones. / Second phalanx. 
 
 b Ulna. e First phalanx. g Third phalanx. 
 
 c Carpal hones. 
 
 Fig. 7. 
 
 Radius 
 
 Foreleg of Horse. 
 a Radius, 
 c Carpal bones. 
 d Rudimentary Metacarpal 
 
 bones (splint bones). 
 e Metacarpal bone. 
 / First phalanx. 
 g Second phalanx. 
 h Third phalanx. 
 
 Wrl Radius 
 
 Ulna— 
 
 Horse— Radius and Ulna united. Man— Radius and Ulna distinct. 
 
 
Paleontology. 103 
 
 iherium have long been known. In the general conformation of 
 the skeleton, and structure of the teeth, these extinct animals pre- 
 sent a wonderful resemblance to the living horse. But they dif- 
 fered in the important features that they possessed three toes in- 
 stead of one, and the division between the radius and ulna was 
 more distinctly marked. In the case of the Hipparion, the two 
 side toes are very small, and of little or no importance to the ani- 
 mal in locomotion. In the Anchitherium, these side toes are much 
 better developed, and materially assisted the animal in walking 
 and running ; the division between the ulna and radius is also 
 more distinct than in the case of the Hipparion. In man, the two 
 bones of the leg, called Tibia and Fibula, are separate and distinct ; 
 the same is also the case with the dog, but in the horse only a trace 
 of the Fibula exists, joined to the upper end of the Tibia. In the 
 Hipparion, the fibula is much better marked than in the horse, 
 while in the Anchitherium it is still more developed. 
 
 From the above facts, the reader will readily observe that the 
 Hipparion is nearer the living horse than the Anchitherium. Even 
 prior to the discoveries of Professor Marsh, the existence of these 
 two forms, so closely united in their structure, and so nearly re- 
 sembling the horse, suggested to advocates of the theory of Evo- 
 lution that they might possibly be the progenitors of existing 
 horses. 
 
 Having once recognized the possibility that the horse could have 
 been developed from a three-toed animal, it was bat a step to five- 
 toed creatures ; and the conclusion that the horse type is but an 
 extreme departure from the general type of five-toed animals was 
 most natural. The series of Equine remains which Professor 
 Marsh has discovered in the Pliocene, Miocene, and Eocene strata 
 of the Western States now demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt 
 the great truth that the living horse has descended from five-toed 
 ancestors by insensible gradations, thus realizing the anticipations 
 of the earlier advocates of the doctrine of Evolution. Taken in 
 connection with the other evidence brought forward in these pages, 
 it places the doctrine of Evolution on the ground of absolute cer- 
 tainty. 
 
 The forms composing this series of extinct horses have received 
 the following names: 
 1. Pliohippus — found in the Pliocene formation. 
 

 104 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Fig.S 
 
 / Existing Horse. 
 
 A Fore foot. B Hind foot, u Ulna. 
 _.( r Radius. / Fibula, t Tibia. 
 
 Splint bones rudimentary. 
 
 Pliohippus. — Splint bones more de- 
 veloped ; Ulna and Fibula also 
 better developed. 
 
 Protohippus, (about size of an Ass.) — 
 Splint bones have developed into 
 lateral toes. Further develop- 
 ment of Ulna and Fibula 
 
 Miohippus, (about size of a Sheep.) — 
 Lateral toes enlarged. Ulna and 
 Fibula still better developed. 
 
 Mesohippus. — The rudiment of a 
 fourth toe has appeared on the 
 fore foot. Continued develop- 
 ment of Ulna and Fibula. 
 
 Orohippus. — Fourth toe much better 
 developed. Ulna and Fibula dis- 
 tinct from Kadius and Tibia. 
 
 Eohippus, (about size of a Fox.) — 
 The rudiment of a fifth toe has 
 appeared on fore foot. Ulna and 
 Fibula well developed. 
 
Paleontology. 105 
 
 2. Protohippus — found in the same formation, and corresponding 
 
 to the European Hipparion. 
 
 3. Miohippus — found in the Miocene formation, and correspond- 
 
 ing to the European Anchitherium. 
 
 4. Mesohippus — found in the same formation. 
 
 5. Orohippus — found in the Eocene formation. 
 
 6. Eohippus — found in the same formation. 
 
 In Fig. 8 is represented the fore leg and hind leg of the living 
 horse, and below, the corresponding parts of the series of fossil re- 
 mains above mentioned. The gradual transition from the one-toed 
 living horse to the five- toed Eohippus can be appreciated. No 
 doubt future discoveries will render these transitions still more 
 gradual, but even as the series now stands the laws of evidence de- 
 mand that we should accept the fact that the one-toed horse has 
 descended from a live-toed ancestor. 
 
106 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Chapter VI. 
 
 Biogenesis,* or the Evolution of the Principle of Life. 
 
 " God giveth it a body as it hath pleased Him, and to every seed His own 
 body. 
 
 " All flesh is not the same flesh; but there is one kind of flesh of men, an- 
 other flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds." — St. Paul. 
 
 "Life is a pure flame, and we live by an invisble sun within us." 
 
 — Sir Thomas Browne. 
 
 The consideration of the Evolution of the Principle of Life on 
 the Globe would naturally follow that of the Globe from a nebu- 
 lous mass ; but, as hinted at the beginning of the fourth chapter, it 
 was thought desirable to marshal the evidence upon which the 
 theory is based before taking up the more obscure questions con- 
 cerning the origin and nature of life. Nor need the reader antici- 
 pate a solution of these great problems in the following pages ; our 
 knowledge of the workings of the forces which constitute life is 
 still altogether too inadequate to enable us to formulate anything 
 like a correct definition of it, or to explain the manner in which it 
 came into being. But the aspiring mind of man, nothing daunted 
 by the difficulties of the way, has striven to attain the heights of 
 positive knowledge even by means of the taper lights which are 
 now in his possession. And these attempts, failures though they 
 be, are to be regarded as an earnest of what future generations will 
 attain to, guided and supported by what has been accomplished by 
 their ancestors. 
 
 Intelligence was given to man by the Great Author of all, and 
 this endowment carries with it the injunction, '"Whatsoever thy 
 hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; " and it also carries with 
 it the promise, "Ask, and it shall be given you ; seek, and ye shall 
 find ; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." He who doubts 
 that these great questions will be more thoroughly mastered by the 
 
 * From Bios, Life, and Genesis. 
 
EXISTI N< 
 
 PLIOHIPPUS-LIKE TYPE 
 
 MIOHIPPUS-LIKETYPE- 
 
 qrohippus-uke type- 
 
 HYPOTHETICAL GE 
 
 IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO ASSUME THAT ANY O 
 ANCESTORS OF 
 
 The existing Equine Family embi 
 
RSES — The one Toed Horse 
 
 rfESOHIPPUS-LIKE TYPE 
 
 PPVJS-- 
 
 OH»PP° S 
 
 -U* £ 
 
 T^P £ 
 
 5t 
 
 INDECIDUATE PLACENTAL 
 FIVE TOED ANIMALS 
 
 DGYOF THE HORSE 
 
 SSIL6 THUS FAR DISCOVERED ARE THE DIRECT 
 ITING HORSE. 
 
 florae, Aas, ZOyra and Quagga. 
 

 
Biogenesis. 107 
 
 human understanding not only fails to read aright the indications 
 written on the dial-plate of human progress by the hand of time, 
 but also calls in question the Divine promises and wise ordinance 
 of things. "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the Earth, 
 and subdue it ; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and 
 over the fowl of the air. and over every living thing that moveth 
 upon the Earth." Nature's most secret chambers will respond to 
 his "open Sesame," and expose to his view all her wealth of hidden 
 treasure. This constant progress in the acquisition of wisdom will 
 bring the mind of man to a higher and higher realization of that 
 Being from whom all things flow as from a fountain. 
 
 Sundry attempts have been made to embody in a definition some 
 idea of the condition we call life, but in every instance these at- 
 tempts have culminated in a vague outlining definition of the 
 method of its action, and in no instance touch upon the nature of 
 the thing itself. 
 
 Thus, we are told by Schelling that " Life is the tendency to in- 
 dividuation. 11 Bicherand defined it to be " a collection of phenomena 
 which succeeded each other during a limited time in an organized 
 body. 11 Mr. G. H. Lewes tells us that " Life is a series of definite 
 and successive changes, both of structure and composition, which take 
 place ivithin an individual without destroying its identity. 11 
 
 Mr. Spencer, in analyzing this great question, carries us through 
 some twenty pages of close reasoning, and, in order not to burden 
 the mind with too much of the truth at once, furnishes a number 
 of relay stations in the shape of preparatory formulae, whence we 
 can review the field gone over, and prepare our minds for that 
 which is to follow. He finally comes to the conclusion (P. Biol- 
 ogy, p. 80,) that, "life is the continuous adjustment of internal re- 
 lations to external relations." 
 
 After carefully studying these various definitions, we discover 
 that we know about as much of the true nature of life as we did 
 when we commenced. The essence of life is not touched upon by 
 any one of them, and all they do, and they do that very imper- 
 fectly, is to give us some idea how life works and manifests its 
 existence. Mr. Spencer's definition is so broad that it takes in the 
 growth of a crystal as much as it describes the growth of a plant 
 or an animal. 
 
 The plant or animal, in enlarging its dimensions, assimilates to 
 
108 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 itself from external surroundings that material best suited to its 
 purpose ; the crystal does the same. The laws governing the re- 
 lations existing between the animal and its external surroundings 
 determine the degree and character of its growth; so it is with the 
 crystal When the animal and plant cease to assimilate, they begin 
 to retrograde through the wear to which they are subjected by ex- 
 ternal conditions; so, when the crystal ceases to enlarge, it begins 
 to diminish through the wearing action of erosion and attrition. 
 
 It is obvious, therefore, that this definition, as distinguishing the 
 peculiar process which all mankind, the learned as well as the ig- 
 norant, agree in calling vital, is no definition at all, for it embraces 
 the growth of the world from a nebulous mass just as much as it 
 does the growth of an animal or plant. 
 
 Even should we define Life as the condition of things resulting 
 from peculiar chemical affinities existing among the atoms, we 
 would still be as much in the dark as ever ; for we know nothing 
 of the nature of the forces causing chemical action ; still less do we 
 know the nature of those forces whose action brings about the 
 peculiar results called life. Granting that life is chemical in its 
 nature, that is to say, that life is the resultant of certain obscure 
 forces existing among atoms which may, very properly, be termed 
 chemical, (because concealed,) yet, it cannot be denied that there 
 is something in the chemistry of life which is widely different from 
 the chemistry of unorganized or non-living matter. Now, it is 
 evident that this Something, whatever it be, is the measure of the 
 difference between life and non-life, and, therefore, it becomes the 
 essential something called life. Now, this essential something, 
 whose presence is necessary for the manifestation of that group of 
 phenomena which we call life has, very appropriate!} 7 , received the 
 name of " Vital Principle" or "Principle of Vitality.''' The word 
 is, therefore, but a symbol of something which certainly exists, but 
 of whose essential nature we know nothing. 
 
 It is nothing more than a confession of ignorance, and stands in 
 the same category with Gravity, Electricity, Magnetism, &c. These 
 terms are used to express the action of certain forces, the nature 
 of which we are, as yet, ignorant. The word Vitality, which has 
 unnecessarily aroused the antagonism of Mr. Huxley and Mr. 
 Spencer, is used in exactly the same sense, that is, to express the 
 existence of an unknown force or forces, whose presence are es- 
 
Biogenesis. 109 
 
 sential for the manifestation of life. Hence, the old and time- 
 honored definition that "Life is the manifestation of a Vital Princi- 
 ple" remains truer, more expressive, and certainly more lucid, than 
 any of the abstruse and clumsy formulas just mentioned, which, so 
 far from telling us what life is, even fail to tell us how it acts. 
 
 The reasons urged for dispensing with the word Vitality are 
 just as cogent for doing away with the words Gravity and Elec- 
 tricity, or any other word which we use to express the limits of our 
 analysis of the ultimate nature of things. 
 
 Mr. Huxley asks the question, (Physical Basis of Life,) " What 
 justification is there, then, for the assumption of the existence in 
 the living matter of a something which has its representative, or cor- 
 relative, in the not living matter which gave rise to it ? What 
 better philosophical status has 'Vitality' than ' Aquosity?' " 
 
 The reply to this question is, that the two words have the same 
 foundation ; and they are, furthermore, perfectly justifiable, for 
 they express the existence of certain forces, not previously presents 
 which compel the atoms of matter in the one case to manifest 
 "Vitality," and in the other "Aquosity." 
 
 This question would not have been asked had the propounder 
 full}- appreciated its significance. For, after a little reflection, is 
 it not obvious that the great difference between a given number of 
 atoms manifesting certain phenomena and the same atoms not 
 manifesting such phenomena lies, not in the atoms themselves) 
 (for in both cases the same atoms are concerned,) but in the Laws 
 or forces which cause these atoms so to group themselves and re- 
 act upon one another as to give rise to the phenomena in ques- 
 tion ? * 
 
 So long, therefore, as a more intimate knowledge of the true 
 
 * Hence it was that the old Atheistical philosophers, more rational than their 
 successors, felt themselves compelled to ascribe to the atoms of matter as 
 many different shapes as there were things in the Universe. Thus, certain 
 atoms formed air, others water, others gold, others silver, and so on. And, 
 consistently, they had no other recourse, for they recognized in the atoms an 
 all-sufficient cause for things, ignoring or disbelieving that there existed an 
 Intelligent Principle which decreed the laws by which the Universe is gov- 
 erned, and that the atoms were like one another in shape, and arranged them- 
 selves into groups to form the various things, according to the special laws 
 which watched over them at the time. 
 
 The sameness of the atoms is now generally held by all men. 
 
110 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 nature of life is denied us by our ignorance of the forces which 
 determine the various combinations of atoms, we cannot hope for 
 a more expressive and more just definition than the time-honored 
 one just mentioned, for a truer definition must define the nature 
 and "raison d'etre" of the forces which determine the peculiar 
 combination of matter we call vital. Thus, whilst we may rest 
 satisfied that Vitality, Gravity, Electricity, Aquosity, and all other 
 " ity's " whatsoever, are merely the resultants of the actions of cer- 
 tain forces, yet we cannot do better than accept these terms as desig- 
 nations of the manifestations of the " Somethings " peculiar to each. 
 The most careful study of those aggregations of atoms which mani- 
 fest the qualities termed vital, offers no clue to the secret. The 
 exhaustive analysis of the substance called Protoplasm, which is 
 common to both the animal and vegetable kingdoms, and which 
 forms the ground-work upon which they are built, reveals the fact 
 that it consists of Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen, and 
 these substances, during the process of dissolution, unite with one 
 another, in proportions, to form carbonic acid, water, and ammonia. 
 But the principle of vitality does not lie in the molecules of C, O., 
 H., and N., of which the protoplasm is composed, but it lies in the 
 forces which compel these molecules to assume that peculiar rela- 
 tion. I need not say that up to this time all efforts to produce 
 protoplasm artificially, by combining in the laboratory the elements 
 of which it is composed, have failed, and until this is accomplished, 
 life will remain an insoluble enigma. Moreover, whilst chemical 
 analysis informs us that the substance called protoplasm is the 
 same wherever it may be found, whether it be taken from the cell 
 of the lowest plant, or whether it be taken from the brain of the 
 most intelligent of human kind, yet reason and experience, with 
 no less authority, tell us that there is something infinitely more in 
 the protoplasm, besides the atomic elements of which it is com- 
 posed, and that the protoplasm of the plant is as widely different 
 from that of man, as the plant, as a whole, differs from Man, as a 
 whole. If we are ever able to comprehend the nature of life in 
 general, we may then entertain a rational hope of being able to 
 understand the difference in the forces which govern the proto- 
 plasm of the plant and that of an animal, but not till then. 
 
 So much for our knowledge of the nature of life. 
 
 The next question before us, " When and how did life origi- 
 
Biogenesis. Ill 
 
 nate? " is not less difficult to answer, scientifically, than that con- 
 cerning its nature. 
 
 All men are now agreed, whether they be Theistical or Athe- 
 istical in their belief, that there was once a time in history of the 
 world when no life existed on its surface.* 
 
 It is evident, therefore, that life has originated, and the When 
 and the How of its coming into being are now the interesting 
 questions for solution. 
 
 Three hypotheses present themselves for consideration : 
 
 1. The Principle of life, in the shape of living organisms, has been 
 
 hurled from the surface of some dissolving world, and, fall- 
 ing upon the surface of our own, has found fitting conditions 
 for its development. 
 
 2. The Principle of life was Instantaneously Created, and this we 
 
 will call the theory of Instantaneous Spontaneous Generation. 
 
 3. The Principle of life was created by a process of Evolution, 
 
 and this we will designate Gradual Spontaneous Generation, 
 or Generation by Evolution. 
 
 The first theory was suggested by Sir William Thompson and 
 Dr. Helmholtz, and two greater names grace not the annals of 
 modern science. But, in spite of the weight of these two great 
 names, the hypothesis, if not unscientific and impossible, is cer- 
 tainly most unsatisfactory and improbable. 
 
 Dr. Helmholtz, referring to the physical objections urged by 
 Zcellner against the theory, says: "Now, in the first place, we 
 know from repeated observations that the larger meteoric stones 
 only become heated in their outside layer during their fall through 
 the atmosphere, while the interior is cold, or even very cold. 
 Hence, all germs which there might be in the crevices would be 
 safe from combustion in the Earth's atmosphere. But even those 
 germs which were collected on the surface when they reached the 
 highest and most attenuated layer of the atmosphere would long 
 before have been blown away by the powerful draught of air be- 
 fore the stone reached the denser parts of the gaseous mass, where 
 the compression would be sufficient to produce an appreciable heat. 
 And, on the other hand, as far as the impact of two bodies is con- 
 
 * That class of Atheists who maintained that the world has existed essen- 
 tially as it is at present from eternity, has disappeared, and given place to 
 Atheistical Evolutionists or Involutionists. 
 
112 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 cerned, as Thompson assumes, the first consequences would be 
 powerful mechanical motions, and only in the degree in which this 
 would be destroyed by friction would heat be produced. We do 
 not know whether that would last for hours, for days, or for weeks. 
 The fragments, which, at the first moment, were scattered with 
 planetary velocity, might escape without any disengagement of 
 heat I consider it even not improbable that a stone, or shower of 
 stones, flying through the higher regions of the atmosphere of a 
 celestial body, carries with it a mass of air which contains un- 
 hurried germs. As I have already remarked, I am not inclined to 
 suggest that all these possibilities are probabilities. They are ques- 
 tions the existence and signification of which we must remember, 
 in order that if the case arise they may be solved by actual obser- 
 vations, or by conclusions therefrom."* 
 
 Granting, then, the physical possibility that the first germs of life 
 were transmitted to our own world from another which had under- 
 gone disruptive convulsions, still the question, how life originated 
 in that world, remains unanswered. If it be held that the world 
 from which we received life received it from another, and that from 
 another, and so on indefinitely, yet this would amount to nothing 
 more than a constant begging of the question, and would give us 
 no clew as to the origin of life in the Universe. 
 
 It is evident that this hypothesis is only a make-shift, and is, 
 therefore, entirely unsatisfactory. 
 
 We are consequently forced by necessity to make choice between 
 the two remaining hypotheses. 
 
 The merits of each may be embodied under two propositions, 
 which, for convenience in comparing, we will place in parallel 
 columns • 
 
 Generation by Evolution, or Grad- Instantaneous Spontaneous Gen- 
 ual Spontaneous Generation. eration. 
 
 1. It gives us a grander concep- 1. It does not elevate our con- 
 tion of the power and Wis- ception of Deity as does 
 
 dom of the Creator. the other, and it tacitly puts 
 
 bounds to His power. 
 
 * Helmholtz's Physical Lectures. 
 
Biogenesis. 113 
 
 2. Whilst there are no facts in 2. There is not the slightest scien- 
 onr possession which di- tific foundation for the hy- 
 
 rectly prove the hypothesis, pothesis, and it does vio- 
 
 yet, reasoning from analogy, lence to all our experience 
 
 we are justified in conclud- of natural processes. 
 
 ing that life, like the va- 
 rious forms it has produced, 
 has been brought into be- 
 ing, from inorganic matter, 
 through the agency of Sec- 
 ondary laws, that is to say, 
 by an Evolving process. 
 That generation by an evolving process carries with it a nobler 
 conception of Divine power than Instantaneous Generation has 
 already been sufficiently proved in the second chapter of this work, 
 where we considered the relative merits of the doctrine of Evolu- 
 tion and the doctrine of Special Creation. The argument there 
 brought forward is of equal weight here, the two propositions be- 
 ing in all respects analogous. The reader is, therefore, requested 
 to refer to the argument there deduced. 
 
 With regard to the second proposition, a brief historical review of 
 the theory of Instantaneous Spontaneous Generation is necessary, 
 and will illustrate upon what an airy foundation the theory rests. 
 
 It was the great English physician, William Harvey, who enun- 
 ciated the doctrine embodied in the words, " Omne vivum ex ovo," 
 "All life from an egg." Whether this was meant by Harvey to ex- 
 press merely a broad morphological generalization,* or whether he 
 also wished to express his disbelief in the theory of (Instantaneous) 
 Spontaneous Generation, universally prevalent in his time, there 
 is a difference of opinion. But whether Harvey was or was not 
 a believer in the theory, it is certain that he attempted no scientific 
 refutation of it ; and the belief that the grub, which make their 
 appearance in all decaying animal matter, were Instantaneously 
 produced, remained unquestioned, even by scientific men, until 
 the distinguished Italian physician, Francis Redi, (1629-1698,) 
 began to experiment upon the subject. He discovered that these 
 worms failed to make their appearance if the fresh meat was pro- 
 tected from free contact with the air by fine wire gauze. From the 
 
 * As Mr. Huxley thinks. 
 
114 Evolutio7i versus Involution. 
 
 results of his experiments, he arrived at the conclusion that the 
 grubs were really produced from eggs deposited by insects flying 
 in the air, which were afterwards hatched by the heat of the Sun. 
 
 But the doctrine, which received such a satisfactory refutation 
 at the hands of Eedi, was again revived when the microscope, 
 which, in the meantime, had come into general use, revealed the 
 presence of animalculae in infusions of animal or vegetable matter. 
 The Spontaneous character of these little microscopic creatures 
 was held by two of the most distinguished men of that day, Need- 
 ham and Buffon, and the weight of their great names once more 
 restored the doctrine of Spontaneous Generation to its original 
 important position in the eyes of the scientific world. 
 
 It was reserved for another Italian physician, Lazarus Spallan- 
 zani, to demonstrate that the appearance of animalcules in such 
 infusions is really due to the presence of germs which adhered to 
 the vegetable or animal matter, or which existed in the air to which 
 the infusions were exposed. He found that by subjecting the in- 
 fusions to a certain degree of heat, and then hermetically sealing 
 them, that the animalcules did not make their appearance. 
 
 But Needham and Buffon, and their adherents, were not satis- 
 fied with this test, claiming that the intense heat to which the in- 
 fusions were subjected destroyed some peculiar chemical property 
 of the infusions, the presence of which was necessary for the pro- 
 duction of the germs. 
 
 From that time up to within quite a recent period, the scientific 
 world has been divided, some claiming that spontaneous genera- 
 tion does occur under certain favorable circumstances, others main- 
 taining, on the contrary, that it never does happen. 
 
 Opinion fluctuated between the two theories according to the 
 results of the latest experiment, and the repute in which the ex- 
 perimenter was held, and it was not until the eminent Frenchman, 
 Pasteur, turned his attention to the subject that the doctrine re- 
 ceived its death blow. No man now living has rendered such 
 distinguished services to science as this great Frenchman, and his 
 name will descend to posterity side by side with that of Jenner, 
 as one of the benefactors of the human race.* 
 
 * The germ theory of disease, which Pasteur has done so much to further, 
 is still in its infancy, but no one can doubt the future important part it is to 
 play in the prevention and cure of disease. 
 
Biogenesis. 115 
 
 The exhaustive character of his researches, essentially similar 
 in their nature to those of Redi and Spallanzani, but much more 
 crucial, has set the matter at rest forever ; and the impossibility 
 of an organism coming into existence Instantaneously is now uni- 
 versally recognized by the scientific world.* 
 
 But if it is impossible for us to realize, experimentally, the con- 
 ditions under which it is possible for an organism to make its ap- 
 pearance by Instantaneous Spontaneous Generation, are we justified, 
 on scientific grounds, in assuming that it ever did occur, particu- 
 larly as it does violence to all preconceived notions of the methods 
 of nature drawn from the analogies which she daily presents ? 
 
 As we have no scientific foundation for the assumption than In- 
 stantaneous Spontaneous Generation ever did occur, and as it is 
 contrary to nature's known methods, it becomes our plain duty to 
 accept the only remaining hypothesis which can account for the 
 appearance of organic life on the globe : that of Gradual Sponta- 
 neous Generation, or Generation by Evolution. It is true that, as 
 far as realizing, by experiment, the conditions under which the 
 process could take place, this hypothesis rests upon the same basis 
 as the preceding ; but the first receives no support from the anal- 
 ogies of nature, whilst the latter, on the contrary, does receive such 
 support ; hence, it is obvious that the latter is the more rational 
 theory of the two. 
 
 Nor must we ignore, in making our final choice, the strength of 
 the arguments contained in the first proposition, namely, that this 
 latter hypothesis carries with it a grander conception of Almighty 
 Power ; the balance before disturbed in favor of the evolving pro- 
 cess by the evidence from analogy is now weighted to the ground 
 by the strength of this latter argument, and we are driven by ne- 
 cessity to accept that hypothesis which holds that organic life has 
 made its appearance on the Earth through the medium of secondary 
 laws acting upon matter, that is to say, by an Evolving process. 
 
 The successive upward steps which led to the investment of dead 
 matter with those qualities which have received the name of life 
 are concealed from us by a veil which the human understanding 
 cannot now penetrate. But relying upon those promises which 
 ♦ 
 
 * The exhaustive researches of Prof. Tyndall have confirmed the experiments 
 of Pasteur. 
 
116 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 man has received, and which the history of the past has tended 
 to corroborate, are we not justified in the hope that the great 
 problem will some day be solved, and the human mind be thereby 
 lifted one step nigher to the Fountain source of all wisdom and 
 power ? 
 
 Mr. Huxley and others have suggested that the organic sub- 
 stance which exists at the bottom of many parts of the Atlantic, 
 and which has received the name Bathybius, may be identical with 
 the first organic matter which the Earth brought forth. This is a 
 gratuitious assumption which has no foundation in the dictates of 
 sound philosophy. For, if the doctrine of Evolution be true, it 
 necessarily follows that the first organic substance must have been 
 common to both the vegetable and animal world, that is to say, 
 both kingdoms of nature had this primordial substance as their 
 point of origin. Now the conditions which gave birth to this 
 must have been peculiar to that age of the world, and are no longer 
 existing. It is in the highest degree improbable, therefore, that 
 this primordial substance is any longer evolved from inorganic 
 matter. 
 
 The word Bioplasm* well expresses this common basis from 
 which both vegetable and animal life have sprung. And we may 
 use the words Pl\ytoplasm\ and Zooplasm,^ to designate the vege- 
 table and animal substances into which the Bioplasm broke up in 
 the process of its development. The adoption of these distinctive ' 
 titles would prevent the confusion which must necessarily arise 
 from the indiscriminate use of the word Protoplasm^ which is now 
 in vogue. 
 
 Thus we are told by Mr. Huxley that Protoplasm is the same 
 wherever it be found, whether it be taken from the cell of a plant, 
 or whether it be taken from the cell of the highest animal. But 
 even if chemical analysis and the microscope ' fail to tell us the 
 difference, sound reasoning teaches us that, so far from being the 
 same, they differ from one another by the same measure that the 
 vegetable differs from the animal. The one is the veritable egg 
 from which the vegetable kingdom has developed, while the other 
 
 * From Gr. Bios, life, and plasma, from plassien, to form. 
 f From Gr. Phyton, a plant, and plasma. 
 \ From Gr. Zoon, an animal, and jilasma. 
 § From Gr. Protos, first, and plasma. 
 
 
Biogenesis. 117 
 
 is the egg from which the animal kingdom has been produced. 
 Thus from the Biogenetic Egg has sprang the Phytogenetic and 
 the Zoogenetic Eggs, and from these the vegetable and animal 
 worlds respectively. 
 
 Whilst we know nothing of the peculiar combination of forces 
 which brought about this development of the Bioplasm into Phy- 
 toplasm and Zooplasm, we are still justified in asserting that they 
 consisted in — 
 
 1. An Inherent tendency on the part of the Bioplasm so to de- 
 
 velop ; and 
 
 2. An Inherent tendency on the part of the environment to fit it- 
 
 self for the reception of the higher life. 
 But why the inherent tendency to development existed, or why 
 an inherent tendency existed on the part of the environment to 
 favor such development, is hidden from us, and, until the human 
 understanding has received further enlightenment, it can only de- 
 fine these forces, as it is compelled to define the totality of 
 things — they are Decrees of the Divine Will. 
 
118 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Chapter VII. 
 
 Phylogenesis,* or the Evolution of the Various Tribes of Vegetable and 
 
 Animal Life. 
 
 We have seen in the foregoing chapter that the primordial or- 
 ganic substance, Bioplasm, which had been evolved from the inor- 
 ganic world by unknown processes, gradually developed into two 
 new substances, Phytoplasm and Zooplasm, from which the vege- 
 table and animal world have respectively sprung. 
 
 In the present chapter, entitled Phylogenesis, a general consid- 
 eration of the tribal history of vegetable and animal life will be 
 entered upon. 
 
 As the reader has already seen in Chapter IY, the Evolution 
 of the organic world may be faithfully represented to the mind as 
 a tree, with all its parts of trunk, branches, and foliage. The main 
 trunk, springing from dead matter, represents Bioplasm, or the 
 common basis of life. The first two branches represent the vege- 
 table and animal kingdoms. The subsequent branches are extinct 
 forms, being the various lines of development which life followed 
 in its progress toward the existing order of things. 
 
 The trunk and branches of this mighty tree have perished, and 
 their remains are strewn in the bosom of their Mother Earth, but 
 the foliage, representing existing life, still remains to testify to the 
 infinite wisdom and power of that Being who planted the seed 
 thereof, and impressed upon it those laws by virtue of which it has 
 developed into such' wondrous beauty and majesty. 
 
 The study of the foliage of this tree constitutes the two great 
 sciences^of Phytology or Botany, and Zoology. Plant and animal 
 life are so closely identified with man's material well-being that we 
 can easily imagine that his first stores of natural knowledge were 
 drawn from these two departments of nature. Man's knowledge 
 of plant and animal life was primarily confined to a discrimination 
 
 * From Phylon, tribe, and Genesis. 
 
Phylogenesis. 119 
 
 of what was beneficial and what was hurtful, both in relation to 
 food and personal safety ; and it was not until he had attained to 
 considerable intellectual development that his knowledge came to 
 be of a purely speculative character. 
 
 The Sciences of Botany and Zoology may be said to have com- 
 menced when primitive man first began to recognize the similarity 
 existing between individuals which bear the closest resemblance to 
 one another, thus leading him to construct a classification based 
 upon the existence of these obvious external characteristics. The 
 groups so formed would, in time, receive distinctive name : the 
 name bestowed embodying some peculiarity of external appearance, 
 mode of life, locality, &c. Every savage' tribe, however low in the 
 scale of civilization, possesses such an unwritten natural history 
 of the plant and animal life which prevail in its territory. 
 
 The North American Indian, as well as the .Bushman of South 
 Africa, have names by which these groups are known among them ; 
 and in proportion to their intellectual development and extent of 
 knowledge do they divide and subdivide the groups so formed. 
 Thus a very low order of intelligence would teach the savage man 
 to discriminate among such widely-separated natural groups as a 
 snake, alligator, bird, and dog, &c. A little more intelligence 
 would teach him that birds were not all alike, and he would grad- 
 ually class together those which most nearly resembled one another, 
 and the smaller groups so formed would also receive distinctive 
 names. And so the specialization would continue until limited 
 by the failure of the discriminative faculty or the absence of ex- 
 ternal differences of structure. 
 
 The popular classification of plant and animal life of to-day is 
 essentially the same as exists among savage tribes. It is not until 
 the mind has attained to a high degree of intellectual power that 
 it can use its special knowledge of particular things to re-interpret 
 the great Universal from which the special knowledge was derived. 
 The infant man uses his discriminating or analytical powers to par- 
 ticularize ; the more-developed man, by the light of these known 
 particulars, is enabled to reverse the process, thus arriving at a 
 better comprehension of the relations which the particulars bear, 
 not only to one another, but to the Great Universal. Thus Knowl- 
 edge, initiated by analysis, or a process of picking to pieces, is sup- 
 plemented by Synthesis, or a process of building up. The attitude 
 
120 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 of the mind in searching after knowledge is, therefore, analytical 
 and synthetical at one and the same time : analytical, with reference 
 to the Unknown "(in the sense of really understanding it) whole; 
 synthetical, with reference to the isolated facts which it thus be- 
 comes possessed of, and whose relations to one another and to the 
 whole it is thus enabled to appreciate. This synthetic or archi- 
 tectural process, though exercised to a limited degree by even the 
 lowest intelligence, can only reach its highest perfection in the 
 highly-developed mind well stored with facts previously ascer- 
 tained by analysis. Hence, in the earliest condition of society, 
 science, properly so called, has no existence, notwithstanding the 
 great number of known facts ; but when the mind begins to study 
 the relations existing between these isolated facts, and rises from 
 one generalization to another, then science proper comes into being. 
 Thus from a really, unknown, though superficially known, whole, 
 the mind proceeds to specialize, and then makes use of this special 
 knowledge to elucidate this unknown whole, and knowledge be- 
 comes science. 
 
 The savage, just emerging from a brute condition, in his obser- 
 vation of nature, learns to discriminate more and more, and in pro- 
 portion as intelligence advances does his knowledge become par- 
 ticularized ; and this continues until he is able to distinguish from 
 one another the smallest natural groups, or those groups in which 
 there is the greatest possible external resemblance existing among 
 its individual members. Hence it is that all classifications of ani- 
 mal and vegetable life are essentially the same among all low intel- 
 ligences, for such classifications are based upon obvious differences 
 of external structure which a low intellect is able to distinguish. 
 It was not until the human mind had been more fully aroused 
 to search out nature in all her hidden recesses that the internal 
 structure of animals, by means of dissection, began to be studied ; 
 and this step, by which the Universal was further particularized, 
 was the first rung of the ladder which has enabled the human 
 mind to attain to the highest generalizations of animated nature 
 yet known. 
 
 The practice of dissection doubtless took its rise from the custom 
 of animal sacrifices which prevailed among all early civilizations. 
 The Medical or Priestly Caste (for both were united in the same 
 individuals, the sacred dignity having been acquired through their 
 
Phylogenesis. 121 
 
 knowledge of curing disease and relieving suffering,*) monopo- 
 lized all knowledge of nature other than the most common, and 
 the curious among those whose duty it was to offer up animal sac- 
 rifices were, in time, drawn to the study of the internal organiza- 
 tion of the animals which they sacrificed : and the first priest wdiose 
 thirst after the unknown led him to look with inquisitive eyes 
 upon the internal structure of the brute is to be regarded as the 
 founder of the science of anatomy. No inconsiderable advance 
 in anatomy must have been made by the Hindoos and Egyptians 
 long prior to Greek civilization ; and it is more than probable that 
 it was from their waitings and teachings that the Greeks first re- 
 ceived that bent toward the stud} 7 of the animal creation which 
 resulted in placing the science of Zoology upon a broader basis. 
 
 The first attempt at a division of the animal kingdom, founded 
 upon internal organization, which has come down to us, was made 
 by Aristotle. He divided the animal kingdom into Two Grand 
 divisions — the higliest comprehending creatures possessed with 
 Bed blood, corresponding to the Vertebrata of modern authors; 
 the lowest comprising those which, in his view, were Bloodless, or 
 provided with a colorless fluid, and corresponding to the Inverte- 
 brata (having no spinal column) of later writers. The path which 
 this universal genius pointed out has been followed by all of his 
 successors ; and the systems of Allian, Pliny, Athenasus, Al- 
 bertus Magnus, Aldrovandrus, Johnston, Kay, and Buffon, were 
 all constructed upon the internal arrangements and functions of 
 the organs. 
 
 The system of Linnaeus was the first important advance made 
 in modern times toward a systematic classification based upon the 
 circulatory system. He divided the animal kingdom into three 
 great sections : 
 
 I. Animals with warm red blood, and provided with a heart 
 
 containing four compartments, viz : two auricles and two 
 
 ventricles. Such are all creatures that suckle (mammalia) 
 
 and Birds. 
 II. Animals with cold' red blood, their heart consisting of but 
 
 one auricle and one ventricle, as he believed to be the case in 
 
 Eeptiles and Fishes. 
 
 * Prior to revelation. 
 
122 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 III. Animals possessed of cold white sanies instead of blood, hav- 
 ing a heart consisting of a single cavity, which he calls an 
 auricle. Under this head he includes insects and all other 
 low forms, to which he gives the general name of Vermes, 
 or worms. 
 The celebrated surgeon, John Hunter, greatly improved upon 
 this classification. Though based upon the same peculiarities of 
 the structure of the heart, it differs widely from that of Linnaeus, 
 being more accurate and comprehensive. 
 
 Hunter divided the animal kingdom into Five great classes : 
 I. Animals whose hearts are divided into Four cavities — Mam- 
 malia and Birds. 
 II. Animals having a heart consisting of Three cavities — Reptiles 
 and Amphibia. 
 
 III. Animals possessing a heart with Two cavities— Fishes and 
 
 most Mollusca. 
 
 IV. Animals whose heart consists of One cavity — Articulated 
 
 animals. 
 V. Animals in which the functions both of stomach and heart 
 are performed by the same organ — Jelly-fish and all the 
 lower order of the animal creation. 
 The great French naturalist, Cuvier, made a great advance upon 
 
 Hunter's plan, and his system forms the basis ujDon which the 
 
 present classification is built. He divided all creatures into Four 
 
 Grand divisions : 
 I. Vertebrata — which includes all animals possessing a vertebral 
 column, and whose nervous system is symmetrical — Mam- 
 malia, Birds, Reptiles, Amphibia, and Fishes. 
 II. Mollusca, {Mollis, soft,) which have no vertebral column or 
 articulated skeleton. Nervous system uusymmetrical and 
 skeleton of a fibrous or testaceous character. All kinds of 
 shell-fish, cuttle-fish, snails, &c. 
 
 IIL Articulata, (Lat. Articulatus, a joint,) — animals consisting of 
 a series of parts articulated or jointed together. Nervous 
 system generally symmetrical. All insects, crabs, worms, 
 &c. 
 
 IV. Zoophytes, (Gr. Zoon, an animal ; JPhuton, a plant,) or Radiata. 
 In which he includes all the remaining forms of the animal 
 ' kingdom. 
 
Phylogenesis. 123 
 
 This system has been modified by later Zoologists, and the clas- 
 sification now most in vogue divides the animal creation into 
 I. Vertebrata — Mammals, Birds, Reptiles, Amphibia, and Fishes. 
 II. Annulosa, (Lat. Annulus, a ring.) — This name describes the 
 general type upon which the animals included under this 
 head are built. It embraces all kinds of crustaceans, in- 
 sects, worms, &c. 
 
 III. Mollusca, which embraces all kinds of shell-fish, cuttle-fish, &c- 
 
 IV. Coelenterata, (Gr. Koilos, hollow; enteron, the bowel.) — It in- 
 
 cludes such forms as the common jelly-fish, coral polyps, &c. 
 V. Protozoa, (Gr. Protos, first ; Zoon, an animal.) — Under this 
 
 head are included all the lowest forms of animal life — 
 
 sponges, amoeba?, infusoria?, &c. 
 A comparison of this classification with that of Cuvier shows 
 wide differences, and it expresses more nearly the views of modern 
 Zoologists in relation to organic development. Thus, the forms in- 
 cluded under the Articulata of Cuvier are typically in advance of 
 the animals included under the Molluscus division. This latter 
 division is. therefore, relegated to the third place in the new order. 
 Cuvier's Articulata are given the second place in the new system, 
 under the name Annulosa ; whilst the old name, Articulata, is re- 
 tained to distinguish a subdivision of the Annulosa. Again, the 
 Coelenterata of the new embraces the higher forms of his Radiata 
 or Zoophytes, whilst the division Protozoa embraces all the lower 
 forms. The word Invertebrata (without Vertebras) is used among 
 Zoologists to designate all animals that have no vertebral column, 
 that is, all the animals included under the four last divisions. 
 
 No linear classification of the animal kingdom, as expressing 
 the relative heights which animals have attained in organization, 
 can be true to nature ; and this for the obvious reason that the 
 animated creation must be looked upon as the foliage of a diversely- 
 branching tree, not as a pyramid, where every successive step rep- 
 resents a higher degree of organization. The only thing a linear 
 classification can do is to show the relative height of the Types 
 under which animals are to be classed. But it must not be for- 
 gotten that the Type of an animal may be high and its organization 
 hiv. Thus, the Lancelet belongs to the highest type of animals, 
 the Vertebrata; but in organization it is far below the cuttle-fish, 
 which belongs to the Mollusca 
 
124 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 The foliage which clothes the ultimate twigs of a branch springing 
 from the main trunk low down may be more elevated above the ground 
 than the leaves of a branch given off from the trunk much higher up. 
 
 But the labors of zoologists are not yet completed ; the classifica- 
 tion given above suggests no analogies with the vegetable kingdom ; 
 none of the relations between the two are made apparent, and 
 until this is done no classification will adequately express the 
 ideas involved in the doctrine of Evolution. 
 
 In the vegetable kingdom the classifications have been almost 
 as numerous as in the animal kingdom. Among the most note- 
 worthy systems which have been suggested in modern times may 
 be mentioned that of Rivinus, 1690, based upon the formation of 
 the corolla ; that of Kamel, 1693, based upon the character of the 
 fruit; that of Magnol, 1720, on the calyx and corolla. In 1731, 
 Linnoeus promulgated his sexual system, founded on variations in 
 the stamens and pistil. The plants in an artificial system have no 
 necessary affinity in their essential organization, and may be only 
 connected by superficial characters. 
 
 "The Linnaean system," says a distinguished botanist, "leads to 
 little more than a knowledge of names, and can only be looked 
 upon as an index to the genera. Though superior to every arti- 
 ficial system previously promulgated, its day has gone by." Some 
 years before Linngeus wrote, the celebrated English botanist, John 
 Ray, divided all plants into Flowerless (cryptogamic) and Flow- 
 ering, (phanerogamic.) The flowering plants he distinguished as 
 Monocotyledonous and Dicotyledonous, according to the number 
 of seed leaves which the embryonic plant developed during its 
 germination. His labors have formed the foundation upon which 
 all the various natural systems have been built since his time. Of 
 these the classifications of Jussieu, De Candolle, and Lindley are 
 the most important. That of Dr. Lindley is in many respects 
 more philosophical than that of any other. He divided the vege- 
 table kingdom into seven great classes : 
 
 I. Thallogens — Flowerless plants, without proper stems or 
 leaves. 
 
 II. Acrogcns, (Gr. akros, summit, and gennao, I produce, signi- 
 fying growth at the summit.) — Flowerless plants with 
 stems and leaves. The principal growth is linear or from 
 the summit of the stem. 
 
Phylogenesis. 125 
 
 III. Khizogens, (Gr. rhiza, a root, and genuao.) — Flowering plants 
 
 with a cotyledonous embryos and fructification springing 
 from a thallus. 
 
 IV. Endogens, (Gr. endo, within.) — Flowering plants. Wood of 
 
 stem youngest nearest the center. Monocotyledonous and 
 parallel venation. 
 
 V. Dictyogens, (Gr. diktuon, a net.) — Monocotyledonous endo- 
 gens with reticulated venation. 
 YI. Gymnogens, (Gr. gurnnos, naked.) — Wood of stem oldest 
 nearest the center ; seeds naked. 
 VII. Exogens, (Gr. exo, without.) — Wood of stem oldest nearest 
 the center ; seeds in a seed vessel. 
 
 In order to thoroughly grapple the full significance of the doc- 
 trine of Evolution, it is apparent that a classification should be 
 adopted which clearly expresses the analogies existing between the 
 two great kingdoms of nature. Almost the first thing suggested 
 to the mind, when the great trunk from which the two spring is 
 contemplated, is that there should be much in common between 
 the two in the character of their growth and development. A cer- 
 tain relationship has long been appreciated, and this kinship has, in 
 a measure, found recognition in classifications which have been sug. 
 gested. For example, the term Zoophytes expresses the analogies 
 existing between certain animals and plants. But whilst occa- 
 sional analogies have been drawn between the two, based upon 
 striking resemblances, yet a full recognition of the entire relation- 
 ship which exists in their manner of growth and position of me- 
 chanical support has never found expression in any classification 
 hitherto suggested. 
 
 If the theory of Evolution be true, we should naturally regard 
 such analogies as so many arguments in favor of their common 
 descent from the first germs of life. If we examine a cross-section 
 of the trunk of an ordinary forest tree, as the oak, chestnut, &c, 
 we observe that it consists of concentric rings of hard dense wood, 
 and its density lessens as we approach the bark. On the outer 
 verge of the woody part we come to a soft cellular tissue, the sap- 
 wood, and it is through this that the sap rises to the branches and 
 thence to the leaves. In a short time the channels through this 
 sap-wood become partialty occluded by the deposition of solid 
 matters which the sap holds in solution, and the soft cellular tissue 
 
126 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 becomes hardened into true wood. In proportion as the channels 
 of the newly-formed tissue become filled up, the less do they enter 
 into the active life of the tree. 
 
 The part which the dense heart-wood of a forest tree takes in 
 its life is the same as that which the bony frame- work plays in the 
 life of an animal — that of Mechanical Support. 
 
 The dense wood of the trunk and branches 'gives rigidity to the 
 whole plant, and enables it to hold aloft its canopy of foliage, thus 
 bringing each individual leaf to the sunlight, enabling it to carry 
 on those vital functions which are essential to the well-being of 
 the whole. Here, then, we have a very obvious analogy between 
 vertebrate animals and Exogenous plants, and it rests upon the 
 Manner of growth and position of Mechanical support. 
 
 The growth of an Exogen is external, and its support is central ; 
 so in the higher animals, embracing all those included under the 
 head Yertebrata, the growth is external and the support central. 
 The bones of an animal, though living, in no sense enter into 
 those vital processes upon which life depends ; they merely give 
 support to those softer parts which are the seat of active life, thus 
 enabling the animal to bring itself into relation with its food-supply. 
 
 If we examine the cross-section of the stem of an Endogenous 
 plant, such as a palm, a very different state of things is revealed 
 from what we saw existing in the oak. Instead of concentric 
 rings of dense wood, we observe that the woody fibers are isolated 
 from one another by intervals of cellular tissue. We also observe 
 that the center of the stem contains fewer of these fibers and more 
 of the soft tissue than the circumference. In these plants the 
 center of the stem is composed of younger tissue than the exterior. 
 They are, therefore, said to be Endogenous, or Internal growers. 
 The palms, grasses, orchids, lilies, &c, belong to this class. 
 
 Endogenous plants find their parallel in the Annulosa and Mol- 
 lusca of the animal kingdom. In the creatures embraced under 
 these divisions, the growth is internal and the support external. 
 Among the annulosa, the supporting frame may be fibrous or crus- 
 taceous ; among the mollusca, it is generally of a shelly character. 
 
 The annulosa are distinguished above the mollusca by the nu- 
 merous articulations which enter into their make-up, so the higher 
 Endogens, comprising the palms and grasses, are distinguished 
 
Phylogenesis. 127 
 
 above the tubers. These latter correspond with the Mollusca, 
 whilst the former are analogous to the Annulosa. 
 
 The name Acrogens, signifying growth from the point or sum- 
 mit of the stem, is given to that division of plants embracing the 
 Ferns, Mosses, Lycopodia. The Acrogenous growth of these 
 plants is paralleled in the animal kingdom by the radiating growth 
 which characterises the creatures embraced under the head Ccelen- 
 terata. These animals, generally speaking, consist of a central 
 cavity with rays or tentacles arranged around it. 
 
 The name Cozloradiata would convey a better notion of the 
 general structure of this class of animals than the one now in use. 
 
 Under the name Thallogens, Dr. Lindley has embraced all those 
 plants in which the stem and leaves are indistinguishable, and 
 where the structure is homogeneous, consisting entirely of cells* 
 The Lichens, Algae, Fungi, &c, belong to this division. 
 
 The Homogeneous structure of these low vegetable forms ena- 
 bles us at once to draw a parallel between them and the class Pro- 
 tozoa of the animal kingdom, for they also consist of a mere ag- 
 gregation of cells. So closely do the two kingdoms of nature 
 approach one another that it is impossible to draw the line be- 
 tween them. 
 
 The Diatomacise have repeatedly changed hands between the 
 Zoologist and the Botanist. At present they rest with the Botan- 
 ist, but there is no telling how long they will be classed with plant 
 life. There is absolutely no microscopical or chemical distinction 
 between Phytoplasm and Zooplasm. The distinguished Zoologist, 
 Kymer Jones, referring to the close relationship between the two 
 kingdoms, says: "Light and darkness are distinct from each 
 other, and no one possessed of eye-sight would be in danger of 
 confounding night with day ; yet he who, looking upon the even- 
 ing sky, would attempt to point out precisely the line of separa- 
 tion between the parting day and the approaching night would 
 have a difficult task to perform. Thus is it with the Physiologist 
 who endeavors to draw the boundary between these two grand king- 
 doms of nature ; for so gradually and imperceptibly do their con- 
 fines blend that it is at present utterly out of his power to define 
 exactly where Vegetable existence ceases and animal life begins." 
 
 The word Homogens, or Homogenous, would well express the 
 
128 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 character of growth which distinguishes the lowest forms of ani- 
 mal and vegetable life. 
 
 The analogies between the two great kingdoms may be arranged 
 thus : 
 
 Plants. Animals. 
 
 i. EXOGENOUS. 
 
 Growth external. Central 
 frame- work of dense wood, which 
 serves the purpose of mechanical 
 support. 
 
 Embraces all plants in which 
 the tissue of the center of the 
 stem is older than that of the cir- 
 cumference. 
 
 Trees and shrubs generally, 
 of temperate climes. 
 
 II. ENDOGENOUS. 
 Growth internal. The densest 
 and oldest tissue is external, 
 and serves the purpose of me- 
 chanical support. Examples — 
 Palms, grasses, lilies, &c. 
 
 III. ACROGENOUS. 
 
 Growth linear, or radiate. 
 Plants trailing or inconspicuous. 
 Structure simple, approaching 
 homogeneity. 
 
 Exs. — Ferns, mosses, some 
 seaweed, &c. 
 
 TV. HOMOGENOUS. 
 Embraces all the lowest forms 
 of vegetable life, which consist 
 
 I. EXOGENOUS. 
 
 Growth, external. Central 
 frame-work of bone or cartilage, 
 which serves the purpose of 
 mechanical support. 
 
 Includes all animals from man 
 to the lowest fish. 
 
 II. ENDOGENOUS. 
 
 (Includes the Annulosa and 
 Mollusca.) Growth internal. 
 An external skeleton of a fibrous, 
 horny, or testaceous character, 
 which serves the purpose of me- 
 chanical surport. Examples — 
 Insects, crabs, worms, oysters, 
 &c. 
 
 III. ACROGENOUS. 
 
 (Ccelenterata.) 
 
 Growth linear, or radiate. 
 Whole animal simple. Tissues 
 soft and approaching homoge- 
 geneity. Live in an aqueous 
 medium. 
 
 Exs. — The common Medusa, 
 Coral polyps, &c. 
 
 IV. HOMOGENOUS. 
 (Protozoa.) 
 
 Embraces all the lowest forms 
 
Phylogenesis. 129 
 
 of nothing more than a mass of of animal life, which consist of 
 cells, so aggregated as to form a a mass of cells so aggregated as 
 botanical individual. to constitute a Zoological indi- 
 
 Exs. — Fungi, lichens, lowest victual. 
 seaweed, &c. Exs. — Sponges, foraminifera, 
 
 infusoria, &c. 
 
 In some the structure is ap- In some the structure is ap- 
 parently so simple as to consti- parently so simple as to consti- 
 tute a single cell, or mass of tute a single cell, or mass of 
 Phytoplasm. Zobplasm. 
 
 The analogies existing between the two Great Kingdoms become 
 very apparent when so contrasted, and the possibility that they 
 have had a common origin appeals to the mind with greater force. 
 But it is foreign to the design of this work to enter into minute 
 details of classification ; and in drawing these parallels, the only 
 object has been to bring before the mind of the general reader the 
 unity of plan which pervades the whole of animated nature, and 
 to strengthen his belief in the probability of a common origin. 
 
 We will now attempt to trace the probable steps which life took 
 in its progress from the primordial Bioplasm to the existing order 
 of things. 
 
 In chapter IV, under the bead of Ontogenesis, incidental refer- 
 ence was made to the fact that in the development of an individual 
 animal from the egg, the embryo, during the various stages of its 
 growth, assumed the form of the Types of life beneath it in the 
 scale of being. These Grand Types, to one of which all living 
 creatures can be assigned, may be described as follows : 
 
 I. ZOOPLASTIC. 
 
 A homogeneous mass of Zooplasm, no definable cell wall, 
 and no distinguishable nucleus. The lowest known Mo- 
 rtem, as Protamceba, some phases of Protomyxa aurantica, 
 the Bathybius* of Huxley, &c, are typical examples. 
 
 * This substance, found spread over the bottom of the sea in certain local- 
 ities, consists of a gelatinous matrix with Coccoliths and Coccospheres imbedded 
 in it. The living nature of the gelatinous matrix is disputed by Dr. Carpenter. 
 He says, (Microscope and its Revelations:) "The observations made in the 
 Challenger expedition, however, have not confirmed this view ; the supposed 
 Bathybius being a gelatinous precipitate, consisting of sulphate of lime, slowly 
 deposited in water to which spirit has been added." 
 9 
 
130 Evolution, versus Involution. 
 
 II. Cell. 
 
 A mass of Zoo plasm bounded by a cell wall ; nucleus 
 and nucleolus well defined. The higher monera generally 
 belong to this type. Amoeba sphcerococcus and Vampy- 
 rella are good examples. 
 
 III. Membranous or Blastodermic. 
 
 An aggregation of cells united to form a continuous 
 membrane, which partially or completely incloses a space 
 or spaces, filled with nutritive material. Magosphoera 
 planula is a good example. The Sponges belong to this 
 type, and in them a horny net-work is secreted by which 
 the cell colony is supported. 
 
 IV. Hollow or Coelenterata. 
 
 The single layer of cells of the preceding type divides 
 into two the external, called the ectoderm, and the internal, 
 called the endoderm. The hollow sphere attaches itself at 
 one point, develops an opening at the opposite end (the 
 mouth) and becomes slightly elongated. The ectoderm has 
 the morphological value of the skin of the higher animals, 
 and the endoderm corresponds with the epithelium of the 
 alimentary canal. From the former is developed the or- 
 gans of locomotion and prehension. Sometimes a third 
 membrane, the mesoderm, is developed between the two 
 former, but the structures which it represents in the higher 
 animals are never developed to any extent in this type. 
 Such is the general struct are of the Hydrozoa. 
 
 Prof. Huxley, in describing this type of animals, says: 
 " The body of every Hydrozoon is essentially a sac com- 
 loosed of two membranes, an external and an internal, 
 which have been conveniently denominated by the terms 
 Ectoderm and Endoderm. The cavity of the sac, which 
 will be called the Somatic cavity, contains a fluid charged 
 with nutritive material in solution, and sometimes, if not 
 always, with suspended solid particles, which perform the 
 functions of blood in animals of higher organization, and 
 may be termed the Somatic fluid." 
 V. Massive or Molluscus. 
 
 In this type the hollow creature of the preceding form 
 becomes more massive by the development from the lies- 
 
Pit ilogenesis. 131 
 
 oderm of the elaborate structures pertaining to the digestive 
 apparatus, and the nervous, vascular, and muscular systems. 
 
 The external investing envelope or integument assumes 
 a much firmer character, thus giving greater support to the 
 soft parts within and affording attachment to the muscles. 
 The movements of the animal are generally sluggish and 
 its migrations limited. 
 VI. Elongated or Annulose. 
 
 The gradual development of the preceding type being 
 attended by increasing wants in the way of food, its migra- 
 tory movements are necessarily increased to supply these 
 growing wants. Such efforts result in further modification 
 of the body, which becomes more elongated to facilitate 
 motion. All parts of the now ivorm-like creature partici- 
 pate in these migratory efforts, and the nervous system, 
 which in the preceding type consisted of scattered ganglia 
 without regularity of arrangement, now assumes a more 
 symmetrical form, and ganglia become developed on either 
 side of the longitudinal axis of the body, supplying both 
 sides with the requisite nervous force and sensibility. Im- 
 mediately beneath this connected chain of nervous ganglia, 
 a fibrous chord, the notochord, becomes developed. This 
 chord, the rudiment of the vertebral column of the suc- 
 ceeding type, gives support to the whole animal and en- 
 ables it to move with facility in search of food. 
 VII. Vertebral. 
 
 The fibrous axial chord of the preceding type is replaced 
 by a vertebral column, separable into distinct pieces, which 
 may remain cartilaginous, as in some of the fishes, or be- 
 come converted into true bone, as in the bony fishes and 
 higher vertebrata. The bodies of the vertebras throw out 
 process on both sides, above and below. Those given off 
 above (or behind) meet and form a canal in which the 
 spinal marrow is lodged ; those given off below (or in front) 
 become the fibs. The anterior end of the spinal chord 
 becomes enlarged, and, separating into distinct ganglia, 
 forms the brain, and this is protected by a casing of bone 
 or cartilage. The digestive apparatus is well developed, 
 and a heart composed of two distinct cavities, an auricle 
 
132 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 and a ventricle, is evolved. The breathing apparatus con- 
 sists of gills only, for the animal is an inhabitant of the 
 waters. Such is the type to which all vertebrate animals, 
 from fish up to man, belong.* 
 
 The embryological researches of the celebrated Von Baer and 
 others have demonstrated that the young of all creatures, in the 
 process of development from the egg, always pass through the 
 Types of life below them in the scale of being. 
 
 Thus, the young of the Coelenterata must pass through the three 
 types preceding it ere it becomes developed into the type to which 
 it belongs. The young of the mollusk must, in addition to these, 
 pass through the coelenterata type, and, finally, the young of a 
 Veretebrate must pass through the entire series. 
 
 If, then, we examine the embryo of a vertebral animal at each 
 stage of its development, we will discover — 
 
 1. The Zooplastic stage, in which the nucleus and nucleolus of 
 the primitive or unimpregnated egg have disappeared, f 
 
 2. The cellular stage, in which the impregnated egg has regained 
 its nucleus and nucleolus and has become a Parent cell. 
 
 3. The Membranous stage, in which the egg undergoes cleavage 
 into cells, and the adherence of these cells forms a continuous mem- 
 brane, the Blastodermic membrane. 
 
 • -4. The Hollow or Coelenterata stage, in which the Blastodermic 
 membrane divides into two, the Ectoderm and Endoderm, inclosing 
 a space between. 
 
 5. The Massive or Molluscus stage, in which another membrane, 
 the Mesoderm, is developed, and which subsequently divides into 
 two. The embryo now consists of four membranes. The outer is 
 to produce the skin, hair, and nails ; the two middle, the digestive 
 apparatus, nervous, muscular, vascular, and osseous systems ; the 
 inner, the lining membrane of the digestive canal. 
 
 6. The Elongated, or Annulose Stage in which the embryo be- 
 comes slightly elongated, and a fibrous chord (notochord) is cle- 
 
 * The Amphioxus is the lowest living form of the vertebrata. This creature, 
 though classed with the fishes, is, properly speaking, headless and without a 
 vertebral column, the notochord being still intact. The heart is tubular. 
 
 fThis disappearance of the nucleus and nucleolus as the first step in devel- 
 opment is not accepted by all embrj^ologists, though maintained by Hreckel 
 and others. 
 
Phylogenesis. 133 
 
 veloped in its long axis in the substance of the outer middle mem- 
 brane. Immediately above the fibrous chord a groove is apparent, 
 the "primitive groove," which is destined to lodge the Spinal 
 ' marrow. 
 
 7. The Vertebral stage. Around the fibrous notochord carti- 
 laginous plates appear, which in time become the bodies of the 
 vertebrae. From these plates processes are given off on either side, 
 in front, and behind : those in front become the ribs ; those given 
 off behind meet, and, coalescing, form the spinal canal, in which 
 is lodged the spinal chord. The anterior end of this chord separates 
 into ganglia and develops the brain, protected by its casing, which, 
 in all the higher vertebrata, becomes bony. The heart consists of 
 two cavities, and branchial arches exist. 
 
 At this stage of development, it is impossible to determine 
 whether the embryo is destined to produce a fish, reptile, bird, 
 quadruped, or man. 
 
 Such are the seven stages of Embryological development which 
 correspond with the seven Grand Types of animal life. 
 
 From these correspondences we may justly infer that every ani- 
 mal reproduces in its own individual development the forms passed 
 through in its Race development. By the light of this truth we 
 can construct the grand trunk of our tree, not, it is true, with forms 
 which exactly resemble those that really did exist, but with types 
 which must have existed if the theory of Evolution be the true 
 explanation of the origin of life. 
 
 Whilst, therefore, we cannot affirm that any existing creatures 
 are in all respects similar to any of man's ancestors, yet we can 
 affirm that the Types upon which they are built are the same as 
 those through which man's line of descent passes. As we descend 
 the tree of life, man's blood relationship with the animal kingdom 
 increases ; and when the foot is reached we are to recognize in the 
 Bioplasm from which it springs the common ancestor of both the 
 animal and vegetable world. 
 
 It now remains to trace the development of the main stem of the 
 vertebrate type up to its culminating point in man. This main 
 trunk, being the line of man's descent, the individual forms com- 
 posing it become his direct ancestors. Whilst it is now, and most 
 likely ever will be, utterly impossible to give anything like a cor- 
 rect notion of what these creatures were like, yet we can acquire a 
 
134 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 vague idea of their salient peculiarities by the light of Embryo- 
 logical development and the study of existing vertebrate forms. 
 
 Existing vertebrata are divisible into Five grand divisions, 
 Fishes, Amphibia, Eeptiles, Birds, and Mammals. There is every' 
 reason for thinking that the Bird form is not in the line of man's 
 descent ; hence it does not enter into the construction of this main 
 stem. We have, therefore, but Four forms to study : the Fish, the 
 Amphibian, the Eeptilian, and the Mammalian. 
 
 This latter is divisible into Water and Land Mammals, and as 
 there can be no doubt that man descended from the latter, our at- 
 tention is confined to it alone. 
 
 Land Mammals are divisible into Cloaca!,* Pouched, f and Pla- 
 cental.^: There is good reason to believe that these forms suc- 
 ceeded one another in development ; hence they all enter into the 
 formation of the main stem. 
 
 Again, Placental Mammals are either Deciduate or Indeciduate. 
 In the former case the Placenta is made up of an intimate union 
 of the lining membrane of the womb with the membranes of the 
 embryo; hence the Placenta is said to be Deciduate. In the Inde- 
 ciduate there is no such intimate union between the tissues of the 
 Mother and the tissues of the Offspring. Now, as man is a deci- 
 duate placental animal, it is obvious that he has descended from 
 deciduate placental ancestors ; hence the Deciduate placental form 
 is another link in the chain. 
 
 Again, in the Deciduate placental animals, the attachment of the 
 placenta to the uterine wall is either zone-like or disk-like. In 
 man the placenta is shaped like a disk ; hence the Disco-placental 
 is another form in the main stem. 
 
 As man's line of descent must have been through some ape-like 
 form, and as the apes are disco-placental, the next in the main stem 
 becomes the Ape Form. From this we are led to the Old World 
 ape, for it is generally conceded that man came into being in the 
 Old World and most likely in Asia. From the Old World ape 
 
 * So called because there is a spacious cloaca common to the rectum, genital 
 and urinary organs. 
 
 t Pouched, or Marsupial, possessing a pouch in which the immature young 
 are carried after birth. 
 
 X Those animals which possess a Placenta, or "after-birth." 
 
Phylogenesis. 135 
 
 we are led to the Asiatic man-like ape ; from this to the ape-man, 
 thence to man himself. 
 
 These various stages of man's descent through the Vertebral 
 Type may thus be briefly outlined : 
 
 1. The Fish-like Form. — The description already given of the 
 general conformation of the Vertebral Type will suffice, in part, 
 to give the reader an idea of what this form must have resembled. 
 When fully developed, this form must have possessed a vertebral 
 column, separable into distinct vertebra?, in which is lodged the 
 spinal chord. The anterior end has developed into a brain, pro- 
 tected by its casing. The digestive apparatus is well developed, 
 and a liver, kidney, and swimming bladder exist. The breathing- 
 apparatus consists of branchial arches, through which the blood is 
 propelled by a heart composed of two cavities. The creature is an 
 inhabitant of the water and its movements are assisted by fin-like 
 processes. 
 
 2. The Amphibian-like Form. — In the process of development 
 of the Fish-like form, the swim-bladder is converted into a rudi- 
 mentary lung, thereby enabling the creature to breathe air as well 
 as water. The pectoral and anal fins become gradually developed 
 into true limbs, armed with digits, which never exceed five in 
 number. The short excursions on land which the animal makes 
 increase the importance of the rudimentary lung, whilst the gilis 
 gradually diminish. The heart is gradually modified to suit the 
 new condition of things and a third cavity becomes developed. 
 The gradual disappearance of the gills is accompanied by further 
 lung development, and the creature is transformed into the next 
 form. 
 
 3. The Reptilian-like Form. — In general appearance this form 
 must have at first closely resembled the preceding. But it differs 
 from it in being purely an air-breather, the gill appendages having 
 entirely disappeared. The heart, which originally consisted of but 
 Three cavities, gradually develops another, and this change initiates 
 the fourth step in development. 
 
 •4. The Gloacal Mammalian Form. — The heart now consists of 
 Four cavities, and generation is ovo- viviparous, that is to say, the 
 egg, which in the preceding forms was hatched outside of the body, 
 is retained and the embryo undergoes partial development in the 
 body of the mother, though there is no placental connection be- 
 
136 Ecolution versus Involution. 
 
 tween them. As the young is brought forth in an immature state, 
 it requires nourishment, and the milk glands of the mother be- 
 come developed to supply tbis want Some of the members of 
 this form acquire land habits, whilst others keep to the water ; 
 from the former are descended land mammals, and from the latter 
 the various mammalian inhabitants of the sea; hence the next form 
 in the main line becomes — 
 
 5. Land Cloacal Mammals. — The habit of seeking the land, ac- 
 quired by some of. the members of the preceding form, becomes 
 confirmed. The organization of the animal is further modified to 
 adapt itself to the new condition of things. As the young are 
 brought forth in a very immature state, & pouch (probably similar 
 to that which exists among existing Marsupials) is developed, in 
 which the young are deposited immediately after birth and there 
 retained until the offspring is more fully matured.* The develop- 
 ment of such a pouch initiates the 
 
 6. Marsupial Form. — In this form a pouch is developed in the 
 vicinity of the milk glands, and the immature young remain at- 
 tached to the nipples until more mature. The internal organs of 
 generation undergo further development, and the Marsupial form 
 gradually passes into the 
 
 7th, or Placental Form. — In this form there is vascular connec- 
 tion between the mother and embryo by means of a placenta, and 
 the period of uterine life is now extended until the embryo is fully 
 matured. 
 
 Placental mammals are divisible into two classes : the Deciduata, 
 in which the entire Placenta is thrown off at birth, and the Inde- 
 ciduata, in which only the foetal part of the Placenta comes away 
 at birth and the lining membrane of the womb remains intact; 
 hence in the latter there is no loss of blood on the part of the 
 parent. 
 
 In man the Placenta is Deciduate. We are, therefore, justified 
 in asserting that he is a descendant of an animal whose Placenta 
 was Deciduous. We may, therefore, reckon this as the next form 
 in the line of descent. 
 
 8. The Deciduate- Placental Mammalian Form. — Examination 
 
 * Among some existing Marsupials, the offspring is retained in the uterus 
 but a single month; it is then born and deposited in the pouch, where it re- 
 mains attached to its mother's nipples until mature. 
 
Phylogenesis. 137 
 
 of all animals in which the Placenta is Deciduous shows that there 
 are two ways in which the Placenta is developed. In Man, Apes, 
 Kodents, &c, the Placenta is a disk-shaped body; hence the name 
 Disco-placental applied to these. In the Carnivora, Proboscidea, 
 &c, the Placenta is developed as a zone, or ring; hence the name 
 Zono-placental. The Disco-placental, therefore, becomes the next 
 form in the line. 
 
 9. Disco-placental Form. — From this form arose the Ape form, 
 and all the lower disco-placental animals now existing. There can 
 be no doubt that man descended from an ape form ; hence this is 
 to be regarded as the next stage of development. 
 
 10. The Ape Form. — Existing apes are divisible into the New 
 World and the Old World Apes. None of the existing New 
 World apes show development comparable to those of the Old 
 World ; hence the ground for assuming this form to be the next in 
 the line. 
 
 11. The Old World Ape. — We know that this form- gave rise to 
 the African and Asiatic apes, from which were developed the 
 man -like apes of both continents. 
 
 As it is generally conceded that man came into being some 
 where on the continent of Asia, we are, therefore, justified in 
 placing the Asiatic man-like ape next in order. 
 
 12. The Asiatic Man-like Ape. — From this form developed the 
 ancestors of the present Orang and Gibbon, and the Ape-man. 
 
 13. T lie* Ape Man we may regard as the direct ancestor of ex- 
 isting man, and, therefore, the last step in the upward course of 
 development. It doubtless resembled existing savages very closely, 
 the chief apparent distinction being the absence of language. 
 Under the influence of those forces which we may distinguish as 
 Soul Forces, the Brute-man developed rational speech, and Man, 
 the crown and glory of creation, came into existence. 
 
 It will be seen from the foregoing sketch of man's development 
 that no living animal form can lay claim to the distinction of being 
 man's direct progenitor. His animal ancestors have long since 
 perished, and it is only in the light of analogy, and the truths of 
 comparative anatomy, and the teachings of Embryology that we 
 can acquire some vague notion of what 'they must have been. The 
 wide gap between man and the apes is rilled up by an hypothetical 
 dumb-ape man. who is supposed to have had a common origin 
 
138 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 with existing man-like apes. The gap which separates man from 
 existing apes lies more in his mental endowments than in physical 
 structure. Physically he belongs to the same family with the apes, 
 but mentally he is as far above them as the stars are above the 
 earth. It has been anatomically demonstrated that there are greater 
 structural differences between the higher and lower apes than there 
 are between the higher apes and man. The greatest structural 
 differences are manifested in the conformation of the skull, and in 
 the weight and shape of the brain. For a long time there were 
 three organs in the human brain which were supposed to be absent 
 in the brain of the apes, viz : the third lobe, the posterior cornu of 
 the lateral ventrical, and the hippocampus minor. But the labors 
 of Huxley have demonstrated beyond a doubt that these charac- 
 teristics are found in the brain of the Chimpanzee, Orang, Gibbon, 
 and in all the genera of the Old World baboons and monkeys, and 
 most of the New World forms. 
 
 The bitter contest which raged between the two great English 
 Biologists, Owen and Huxley, is still fresh in the minds of men, 
 but that Huxley established his position with reference to this 
 question is now universally recognized. 
 
 The truth is that these points are found to be, in many cases ; 
 more largely developed in the ape than in man himself. "As to 
 the convolutions, the brains of the apes exhibit every stage of pro- 
 gress from the almost smooth brain of the Marmoset to the Orang 
 and the Chimpanzee, which fall but little below man. 'And it is 
 most remarkable that, as soon as all the principal sulci appear, the 
 pattern according to which they are arranged is identical with that 
 of the corresponding sulci of man. It is only in minor characters, 
 such as the greater excavation of the anterior lobes, the presence of 
 fissures usually absent in man, and the different disposition and pro- 
 portions of some convolutions that the Chimpanzee's or the Orang's 
 brain can be structurally distinguished from man's.'' — (Huxley.) 
 
 But while there are few tangible structural differences, differences 
 that can be appreciated by the naked eye or even by the micro- 
 scope, yet there must be very wide distinctions in minute structure 
 which no means at our command can enable us to determine. The 
 chief apparent difference in* the brain of man and that of the higher 
 apes is clearly seen in its development as a whole, its size and 
 weight. And this is all the more remarkable when we consider 
 
Phylogenesis. 139 
 
 that the body of a well-developed gorilla is about twice as heavy 
 as an average man, whilst the weight of an average human brain 
 is more than twice as heavy as the brain of a gorilla. But even 
 this wide difference in the degree of brain development is not suffi- 
 cient, in the opinion of the writer at least, to account for the im- 
 mense gap which exists between the intellectual power of the 
 lowest man and that of the highest ape. Man. as an animal, must 
 be classed with the apes; man, as an intellectual entity, must be 
 numbered with the Immortals. There is something in man which 
 tells him to look up, and teaches him that he is set apart for higher 
 things, that a nobler destiny awaits him. 
 
 To this /Something the name of Soul has been given, and man's 
 essential nature lies therein. Those philosophical systems which 
 make man's intellectual part depend entirely upon the action of 
 brain molecules deny by implication the existence of an inde- 
 pendent immaterial thing called Soul. With them intellect is 
 merely a phenomenon of the action of material atoms. Sad to 
 relate, many of the most widely-known names of modern science 
 have committed themselves to this line of belief and are its greatest 
 champions. 
 
 We have attempted to trace the line of development pursued 
 by the first form of life until we see it culminating in man as the 
 topmost branch of this wonderful tree of animated creation. These 
 various stages may be briefly summarized : 
 
 1. Zooplastic. 
 
 2. Cellular. 
 
 3. Membranous. 
 
 4. Hollow or Ccelenterata. 
 
 5. Massive or Molluscus. 
 
 6. Elongated or Annulose. 
 
 7. Fish-like or Vertebral. 
 
 8. Amphibian -like. 
 
 9. Reptilian -like. 
 
 10. Cloacal Mammalian-like. 
 
 11. Land Cloacal — Mammalian-like. 
 
 12. Marsupial-like. 
 
 13. Placental Mammalian-like. 
 
 14. Deciduate Placental Mammalian-like. 
 
 15. Disco-placental Mammalian-like. 
 
140 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 16. Ape-like. 
 
 17. The Old World Ape. 
 
 18. Asiatic Man-like Ape. 
 
 19. Ape -Man. 
 
 20. Man. 
 
 The theory of Evolution asserts that, were it possible to pass in 
 review all the individual generations which enter into the forma- 
 tion of the main trunk of the tree of Life, the transition from one 
 to the other would be so insensible that it would be impossible to 
 distinguish any two contiguous generations. It is obvious, there- 
 fore, that the absolute number of stages through which man has 
 passed correspond to the number of generations which have appeared 
 on the earth since life came into being. The nineteen stages above 
 laid down are merely so many typical forms, so many eqm-distant 
 points marked off on the trunk of the tree of life, and the gaps 
 between must be filled by innumerable transition generations. 
 
 The reconstruction of the various branches of the tree of life is 
 now the great goal of the sciences of Zoology and Botany. The 
 records of Geology have already done much in this direction, and 
 much more may be anticipated. But anything like an accurate 
 and complete rehabilitation will forever remain, in the very nature 
 of things, unattainable. 
 
 The accompanying chart lays no claim to be considered even an 
 attempt, and is only introduced to bring before the mind of the 
 general reader an idea of how the diverse forms of life might have 
 originated from a common source. He is requested to use his 
 imagination a little and clothe the branches with foliage, which 
 will represent existing life on the globe. 
 
 He who can contemplate the majestic tree of animated nature 
 and deny the existence of an innate tendency on the part of the 
 first germ of life to develop as it has done, may, with equal jus- 
 tice, deny to the acorn the potential power of bringing forth the 
 oak. In both, external conditions are essential to the full devel- 
 opment of the germ. An acorn planted in a mere sand-heap could 
 never bring forth the sturcty oak, neither would the germs of life 
 have developed had it not been for favoring conditions. But it is 
 also obvious that were it not for the internal tendency the acorn 
 would be powerless to produce the oak, even though it were 
 planted in the richest soil. How it is that so many modern thinkers 
 

Phylogenesis. 141 
 
 have closed their eyes to this great truth is an inexplicable mys- 
 tery. 
 
 Mr. Spencer, in criticising Dr. Owen for holding "the axiom of 
 the continuous operation of creative power, or of the ordained be- 
 coming of living things" says: "In whatever way it is formulated, 
 or by whatever language it is obscured, this ascription of organic 
 evolution to some aptitude naturally possessed by organisms or 
 miraculously imposed on them is unphilosophical. It is one of 
 those explanations which explains nothing — a shaping of igno- 
 rance into the semblance of knowledge. The cause assigned is 
 not a true cause — not a cause assimilable to known causes — not a 
 cause that can be anywhere shown to produce analogous effects. 
 « * * j n Dr j e f ? this assumption of a persistent formative power, 
 inherent in organisms and making them unfold into higher forms, 
 is an assumption no more tenable than the assumption of special 
 creations."* 
 
 This criticism, passed upon the most illustrious of living zoolo- 
 gists, is certainly very severe. But will Mr. Spencer explain how 
 it is that of two eggs subjected to exactly the same external condi- 
 tions one will bring forth a chicken, the other a duck? Mr. 
 Spencer would be the last one to accept the old theory of " Pre- 
 formation," referred to in the first chapter ; how, then, would he 
 explain the production of these very different creatures from 
 masses of protoplasm which are apparently so nearly alike? For 
 so nearly alike are they that no zoologist would pretend to dis- 
 criminate between the primitive eggs of either. Obviously, Mr. 
 Spencer is compelled to acknowledge that the differences between 
 the two reside in the " innate tendencies" peculiar to each. The 
 process asserted by the doctrine of True Evolution, and so well 
 expressed by the axiom of Dr. Owen, finds its analogy in every 
 seed and egg throughout the wide field of nature. It is a process 
 which is entirely "assimilable to other processes," Mr. Spencer to 
 the contrary notwithstanding. 
 
 The doctrine of True Evolution, then, asserts that the first germs 
 of Life, or the Biogenetic egg, possessed an innate tendency to 
 bring forth the tree of Life with all its innumerable and wide- 
 spreading branches ; it recognizes the necessity for favoring con- 
 
 * Principles of Biology, page 404. 
 
THE TREE OF LIFE 
 
 E "55 
 
 m 
 
 P H I O 
 
 
 ES. 
 
 1EIA 
 LIA. 
 
 x 
 
 " 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 | 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 CO 
 
 8 
 
 ZS3 
 
 > 
 
 > 
 
 1 ?P 
 
 H 
 
 & > 
 
 i> 
 
 HYPOTHETICAL GENEALOGY OF THE ANIMAL KINGDOM 
 
142 
 
 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 ditions, without which these innate tendencies could not have 
 made themselves manifest ; and it also recognizes an innate ten- 
 dency on the part of the globe to fit itself for the reception of 
 higher and higher life. But, above all, it recognizes the existence 
 of an Omnipotent Causative Power, who, in the beginning, created 
 the atoms, and impressed upon them the laws which have insured 
 the production of what we see around us; and in the material 
 Universe, with its multitudinous phases, we are to behold these 
 primal laws unfolded for our contemplation. The material Uni- 
 verse is but the mirror which reflects the Infinite Ideal. 
 
Psychogenesis. 143 
 
 Chapter VIII. 
 
 PSYCHOGENESIS OR THE EVOLUTION OF THE SoUL. 
 
 " There is a natural body and there is a spiritual body. 
 
 Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural ; then 
 that which is spiritual. 
 
 The first man is of the earth, earthy ; the second man is of heaven." — St. 
 Paul. 
 
 In the preceding chapter, we considered man, the animal, com- 
 posed of a mass of bones, muscles, blood-vessels, and nerves. In 
 the present chapter, we are called upon to contemplate man, the 
 Immortal Soul, endowed with the consciousness of Eight and 
 Wrong, and destined to a never-ending existence. Before pro- 
 ceeding with the discussion concerning the origin and nature of 
 the Soul, it will be well, in order to prevent possible misunder- 
 standing, to call the readers special attention to the argument set 
 forth in the second chapter as to the nature of Evolution in gen- 
 eral. The formula there given to embody the doctrine of Evolu- 
 tion is a genuine scientific deduction from the field of experience. 
 That formula reads thus: Evolution is a change from the complex 
 to the simple — a progressive unfolding of cause into effect. 
 
 It was shown that this formula, arrived at by the observation of 
 nature, was also a necessary outcome of our conception of a Primal 
 Being upon whom all things depended, and that this proximate or 
 Scientific definition of necessity merged itself into the ultimate or 
 Transcendental definition, that Evolution in its totality is the con- 
 tinuous unfolding of the will of the great First Cause. 
 
 And here let me caution the reader not to confound the essence 
 of this First Cause with the will power which it manifests in the 
 phenomenal Universe, as was done by all the pantheistic systems 
 of earlier times and as is done by the Spencerian philosophy of 
 to-day. 
 
 It was also shown in the same chapter that the ultimate nature 
 of the Divine Essence, not being comprehensible by a created in- 
 telligence, could not be a subject of study properly so called, but 
 
144 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 only of devout contemplation, and that the manifestation of His 
 Will in the phenomenal Universe was the only domain open to 
 investigation. 
 
 Now, the Great First Cause or Divine Essence has manifested 
 His Will in the Universe in different ways, that is to say, human 
 consciousness is affected in different ways by it. 
 
 That embodiment of His Will which affects us as occupying 
 space we designate Material. That embodiment of His Will 
 which does not affect us as occupying space is termed the Imma- 
 terial.* 
 
 Under the head of the Material, the atoms only are embraced; 
 under the Immaterial are included all those other expressions of 
 the Divine Will which are cognizable by the understanding. 
 These various Immaterial embodiments of His Will have received 
 different names, according to the sphere of their activity. Those 
 at work in what is called the Inorganic world, bringing about the 
 various phenomena which it presents, are designated Physical or 
 Material Forces; those which compel the atoms to aggregate into 
 masses which manifest the phenomena of Vitality are called Vital 
 Forces; those which induce still higher atomic aggregation may 
 be called Instinct Forces ; and finally, those that compel the atoms 
 to assume the highest relations known to -us, to which the name 
 of Intellectual Forces or Soul has been given. 
 
 Force, therefore, whatever be the sphere of its activity, or what- 
 ever the phenomena to which it gives rise, can only be defined as 
 the Immaterial Expression of the Divine Will. The atoms may 
 be regarded as the Passive Expressions of Will, whilst the Laws 
 or Forces governing them are the Active Expressions of the same 
 Will. Thus, whilst mere science teaches us the Permanence of 
 Force and the Indestructibilit} 7 of Matter, philosophy teaches us 
 that these, being but expressions of Divine Will, become extin- 
 guished by the withdrawal of the will of which they are the em- 
 bodiments. 
 
 The visible Universe, then, presents us with a blending of these 
 two different modes of will manifestation on the part of the Deity, 
 and the aetion of the one upon the other occasions all the phe- 
 nomena. It is obvious that the will power expressed by the 
 
 * The act of Creation can only be denned as the expression or unfolding of 
 the Will of the First Cause. 
 
Psychogenesis. 145 
 
 Passive atoms serve only as a basis for the working of the Imma- 
 terial Expressions, called Laws or Forces, to which human inge- 
 nuity has given different names, according to the character of the 
 phenomena presented. The visible Universe, therefore, as we con- 
 ceive of it, is Immaterial in its nature, the atoms merely filling up 
 the form thereof, manifesting thereby to our cognition the exist- 
 ence of the governing Forces.* 
 
 When, in the course of untold ages, the atoms of matter under 
 the supervision of the laws or forces set over them by Omnipotence 
 had arranged themselves into certain aggregations, then the Prin- 
 ciple of Life became manifested or Evolved. Through the con- 
 tinuous working of these laws, the atoms were compelled to assume 
 higher and higher combinations, through which higher and higher 
 Life manifested its existence until the highest aggregation of all 
 was reached. 
 
 We saw, in chapter IV, how the inorganic world gradually 
 prepared itself for the reception of life, and when the fitting time 
 came life appeared. We also saw how the Earth continued to fit 
 itself for the abode of higher and higher forms of existence. 
 
 Just as the inorganic matter of the globe fitted itself, through 
 the influence of preexisting "Vital Forces, for the manifestation of 
 the phenomena of Vitality, so animal life, in its gradual ascent to 
 higher forms, was being prepared for the manifestation of that in- 
 finitely higher form of existence called the human Soul. 
 
 When, in the fulness of time, the animal brain, under the influ- 
 ence of these Soul forces, had been carried to that degree of devel- 
 opment which enabled it to manifest this new and more exalted 
 life, the Principle of the Soul may be said to have taken up its 
 abode upon the Earth and its animal possessor assumed his station 
 at the head of animated nature, inaugurating a new era in the 
 history of terrestrial creation. 
 
 The opponents of the doctrine of Evolution may argue that the 
 Soul being essentially different in its nature from the intelligent 
 or instinct principle which even the most exalted brutes exhibit, 
 man, therefore, could not have been evolved from them. The 
 
 * Berkeley had a. keener insight into the nature of things than any man 
 since his time. The most absurd interpretations have been placed upon his 
 views by those who failed to penetrate the depth of his reasoning. Though 
 Berkeley had no use for atoms, he never denied the existence of visible things. 
 10 
 
146 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 difference being not only one of degree but also of kind, how could 
 the one bring forth the other? How can anything produce some- 
 thing wholly different from itself? These objections lose all 
 weight when the true nature of Evolution is kept in view. For, 
 as already so frequently insisted upon, Evolution is and can be 
 nothing more than the continuous unfolding of the will of the 
 Great First Cause. 1 he process, therefore, only becomes possible 
 when there are superimposed laws to be made manifest. 
 
 In discussing the origin of life, we saw that the principle of Vi- 
 tality resided not in the molecules of Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen, 
 and Nitrogen, of which the Bioplasm was composed, but in the 
 laws or forces governing them. So the principle of intelligence 
 in animals, known by the name of instinct, and the still loftier 
 principle of the Soul in man, reside, not in the atoms of which the 
 brain is composed, but in the Immaterial laws which have com- 
 pelled these atoms to assume the relations which enable them to 
 manifest these principles. 
 
 When the animal had attained to its full development merely 
 as an animal, new laws, Soul laws, came into operation and forced 
 the atoms into still higher aggregations, thus enabling them to 
 manifest this new Principle. It is obvious that this is no less 
 a creative act on the part of the Deity than if He had molded 
 man's material frame immediately from inorganic matter and 
 breathed into it directly the Principle of the Soul. It is therefore 
 apparent that the objections urged against the origin of the Soul 
 through an evolving process have no foundation in reason, and 
 arise from a misapprehension of the true nature of Evolution, 
 which is nothing more than a continual unfolding of the Divine 
 Will. 
 
 Mr. Darwin well says, (Descent of Man, Vol. II, page 378:) 
 "Few persons feel any anxiety from the impossibility of deter- 
 mining at what precise period in the development of the individual 
 from the first trace of the minute germinal vesicle to the child 
 either before or after birth man becomes an immortal being, and 
 there is no greater cause for anxiety because the period in the 
 gradually-ascending organic scale cannot possibly be determined."* 
 
 * This was written before Mr. Darwin had assumed the avowedly atheist- 
 ical attitude which he subsequently fell into. 
 
Psychogenesis. 147 
 
 The doctrine, as enunciated by Mr. Spencer and his coterie, 
 does indeed offer insuperable obstacles. But, as already suffi- 
 ciently shown, his philosophy is one of Involution j and not of 
 Evolution. His system does not recognize an Intelligent Great 
 First Cause, the author and sustainer of the Universe; hence, ac- 
 cording to his theories, the moral or Soul principle in manjis essen- 
 tially the same as the Instinct principle manifested by the lower 
 creation, and is doomed like it to be dissipated when the matter 
 of which the material frame-work is composed resolves itself into 
 its constituent elements. It is not surprising that his system 
 should arouse the antagonism of every mind that entertains a hope 
 of a future life. But the origin of the Soul as expounded by the 
 doctrine of true Evolution presents no such obstacles to the mind, 
 and it, furthermore, elevates our conception of Infinite Wisdom 
 and Power. 
 
 In chapter II, when the relative merits of Evolution and Special 
 Creation were under consideration, it was shown that there is 
 nothing in Genesis, when taken literally and without interpretation, 
 which throws any light upon the methods of the creative process ; 
 the bare statements of creation only are made. But, when we 
 bring to our assistance in the elucidation of this account the teach- 
 ings of modern science, and give another meaning to certain words 
 which will bear a different interpretation in the original, it is a re- 
 markable fact that a picture will be presented such as the most 
 advanced modern scientists have painted. It is to be remembered 
 that this description of creation was written for the instruction of 
 man in all the stages of his intellectual growth. At the time of 
 its deliverance the mass of the people was buried in ignorance, and 
 practiced superstitious rites to innumerable gods. They had not 
 yet risen to the conception of One Supreme, non-material Being, 
 the author of all other being, but " bowed down to wood and 
 stone." It was obviously the intent of the writer of Genesis to 
 draw the mind away from the contemplation of the material world 
 and lift it to the conception of a Being, not the world, but the 
 author of it. But, as it was written not only for the edification of 
 the people of that early period but for man at every stage of intel- 
 lectual progress, the description of creation was so couched as to 
 reflect the truth for all men and for all time. To early man it taught 
 the great truth that the world is not Uncaused and Eternal, but 
 
148 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 that it was created by a Being very different from it in nature. 
 To man of this nineteenth century, whose mind has been enlight- 
 ened by the discoveries of science, it further teaches that the cre- 
 ative process has been continuous and gradual. 
 
 Though we are not to look upon Genesis as an attempt on the 
 part of its author to draw a minutely accurate scientific picture, 
 yet science is far from being wholly ignored, and the general out- 
 lines given of the creative process, when properly interpreted, will 
 stand the severest scrutiny of modern scientific thought. Before 
 attempting to follow the interpretation, the general reader is earn- 
 estly requested to re-peruse the third chapter, in which an outline 
 sketch of the nebular hypothesis is given. In the following run- 
 ning commentary, the original is placed in one column and in a 
 parallel column the account is interpreted. The reader will thus 
 have no difficulty in comparing the two.* 
 
 Original. As Interpreted. 
 
 1. In the beginning God ere- Literal, 
 ated the heaven and the earth. 
 
 This first verse is to be regarded as a preamble to the whole 
 chapter — the enunciation of the comprehensive fact of creation in 
 general, and in which is embraced, by implication, the creation of 
 the matter which forms the basis for the Material Universe. 
 
 2. And the earth was with- 2. And the earth was with 
 out form, and void ; and dark- out form, (that is, had not assum- 
 ness was upon the face of the edform,) and (therefore) void, (i. 
 deep; and the spirit of God e., non-existent-^) and darkness 
 moved upon the face of the was upon the face of the deep, 
 waters. (i. e., on the boundless expanse 
 
 of space;) and the spirit of God 
 moved upon the face of the 
 Gases, (or Fluids.) 
 
 * This interpretation of the first chapter of Genesis differs from that of 
 Guyot in one very essential point. He thinks that the word "Earth," in the 
 second verse, should be interpreted as referring to matter in general. In other 
 particulars the in terpretations agree. These pages were written before Guy ot's 
 work entitled "Creation" had been published, and before the author was aware 
 that he held such views regarding the Biblical account. 
 
Psychogenesis. 149 
 
 This verse is to be looked upon as a picture of primeval space 
 with its formless mass of diffused matter. It asserts that the ma- 
 terial of which the Earth is composed was without form, that is to 
 say, the Earth itself, as yet, did not exist ; it is therefore referred 
 to as being "void" This is the only true interpretation to be 
 placed upon the word "void." It is not used in the sense of an 
 existing thing being empty of something, but is meant to convey the 
 idea of the non-existence of the Earth itself. This interpretation 
 floods the whole verse with light, and renders unnecessary the 
 strained explanation of Guyot, who thought the word Earth should 
 be translated Matter in General. The word " Erets " (the Earth) 
 does refer to our Globe, but it refers to it as non-existing ; thus 
 the whole difficulty is cleared up. 
 
 The word Maim, which lias been translated "Waters" may, on 
 the authority of the first Hebrew scholars, be interpreted "Gases" 
 or "Fluids." 
 
 The spirit of God moving upon, or brooding over, the face of 
 the Gases, beautifully expresses the creation of the law of Uni- 
 versal Gravitation, which now came into being, and under whose in- 
 fluence the creative act of the next verse was to be made manifest. 
 
 3. And God said, let there be 3. Literal, 
 light; and there was light. 
 
 This verse announces the fact that light appeared in obedience 
 to command. Had the writer attempted to explain that light was 
 the result of the heat caused by the rushing together of the atoms 
 in obedience to the law of Universal Gravitation which Omnipo- 
 tence had impressed upon them, the untutored minds of the people 
 would not have had the slightest conception of what he meant to 
 convey. It is, therefore, not surprising that he should name as the 
 first act of Creation the appearance of light. This would impress 
 their minds more fully with the magnitude of the Creator's Power. 
 
 4. And God saw the light, 4. Literal, 
 that it was good ; and God di- 
 vided the light from the dark- 
 ness. 
 
 Here we have a simple statement of the fact that the light dis- 
 pelled the darkness from that part of space which was the seat of 
 Creative Power. 
 
150 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 5. And God called the light 5. And God called the light 
 day, and the darkness he called day, and the darkness he called 
 night, and the evening and the night, and the beginning and the 
 morning were the first day. ending were the first Period. 
 
 The words day and night, even in this matter-of-fact age, are 
 often used as synonyms for light and darkness. Moses used the 
 words in this sense, without the slighest reference to the sun, which 
 had not yet been created. The words "morning," "evening," and 
 "day," are to be interpreted "beginning," "ending," and "Period." 
 Thus we often speak of the morning and evening of life, meaning 
 thereby the beginning and ending of life. In the verse the meta- 
 phor is carried out, and the indefinite duration which must have 
 elapsed is therefore spoken of as a day. 
 
 With the fifth verse the first period of Creation or Evolution 
 ends. It embraces a description of the primitive void; the crea- 
 tion of the atoms of matter ; the creation of the law of Universal 
 Gravitation, and the flowing together of the atoms as a result of 
 this law ; the production of light, induced by the intense heat 
 evolved by the attrition of the atoms. The Universe was a whirl- 
 ing mass of flaming matter. 
 
 And now we come to the Second period of Creation — the Evo- 
 lution of the individual worlds from this heated fluid mass. 
 
 6. And God said, let there be 6. And God said, let there be 
 a firmament in the midst of the a firmament in the midst of the 
 waters, and let it divide the wa- Fluids, and let it divide the 
 ters from the waters. Fluids from the F 1 luids. 
 
 Here commences the evolving process of world formation. We 
 have seen that space was filled with a fluid mass, the word 
 ' ' Waters " should, therefore, be interpreted "fluids." The creation 
 of the firmament (the word signifies a "bounding space or ex- 
 panse'') refers to the vacant places left by the withdrawal of the 
 matter from those spaces, and its centralization under the influence 
 of various centers of attraction. These numerous centers of at- 
 tractive energy are produced by the throwing off of smaller masses 
 from the revolving whole. These, in their turn, throw off smaller 
 masses, and these still smaller, and so the process of world forma- 
 tion continues. 
 
Psychogenesis. 151 
 
 7. And God made the firma- 7. And God made the firma- 
 ment and divided the waters ment and divided the fluids 
 which were under the firmament which were under the firmament 
 from the waters which were from the fluids which were above 
 above the firmament; and it the firmament; and it was so. 
 was so. 
 
 8. And God called the firma- 8. And God called the firma- 
 ment Heaven, and the evening ment Heaven, and the beginning 
 and the morning were the second and the ending were the second 
 day. period. 
 
 In these two verses we have a recognition of the fact that the 
 command of the sixth verse had been obeyed ; that order had 
 come out of chaos, and that innumerable worlds, each revolving 
 around a center, beautified space and added its rythmic pulsations 
 to the tuneful choir of the spheres. 
 
 With the production of this universal order the Second day or 
 period of Creation is very appropriately said to end. 
 
 9. And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered 
 together unto one place ; and let the dry land appear; and it was so. 
 
 10. And God called the dry land Earth ; and the gathering to- 
 gether of the waters called He Seas ; and God saw that it was 
 good. 
 
 11. And God said, Let the Earth bring forth grass, and the herb 
 yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose 
 seed is in itself, upon the Earth ; and it was so. 
 
 12. And the Earth brought forth grass and herb yielding seed 
 after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, 
 after his kind ; and God saw that it was good. 
 
 13. And the evening and the morning were the third day. 
 This third day embraces the development of the Earth from its 
 
 primitive molten character, as thrown from the sun, to the first ap- 
 pearance of Life upon its surface. The ninth and tenth verses de- 
 scribe the period during which the globe was preparing itself for 
 the reception of Life. The word "Waters" is here used in its 
 ordinary significance. 
 
 In the eleventh and twelfth verses this life is described as being 
 vegetable in its nature, and no reference is made to animal life of 
 any kind. 
 
152 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Now vegetation, in the minds of the ignorant, even to this day, 
 is associated with land. Had Moses, therefore, attempted to ex- 
 plain that the first forms of both vegetable and animal life were 
 produced from the waters, it would have confused their minds, and 
 obscured the picture which he wished them to contemplate. The 
 low vegetable and animal forms which first appeared in the waters 
 were not such as they were familiar with, and, therefore, no lesson 
 could be drawn from them with which to impress their minds. 
 He, consequently, in his description of the development of life on 
 the Globe, entirely ignores the very low forms of the vegetable and 
 animal kingdoms, and confines himself to that part of the animated 
 creation with which his people were familiar, that is to say, with 
 High life in all its Grand divisions of Vegetable, Marine, and Land 
 animal life. Now such a division as this does represent an ascend- 
 ing scale of development; for vegetable life is lower than animal 
 life, and, in the animal kingdom, marine life is much lower, with 
 the exception of the Marine Mammalia, than the birds of the air, 
 and birds are lower than the higher land animals. Had Moses 
 told them that both animal and vegetable life were created at this 
 time, and that they were both of Marine origin, his audience would 
 have at once supposed that the plants' and animals they saw around 
 them were referred to, and this notion could only have been dis- 
 pelled by giving each a microscope and a basin of water contain- 
 ing a number of specimens from the lowest representatives of both 
 kingdoms. Again, had he told them that many of the higher 
 marine forms, as the whale and porpoise, belonged to the same 
 class as the higher land animals, he would have still further con- 
 fused their minds, and his only escape out of the difficulty would 
 have been a scientific lecture on comparative anatomy. How such 
 an exposition would have been received by the descendants of 
 Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the reader is left to determine. It is, 
 therefore, evident that Moses acted more wisely than many of his 
 critics would have done under similar circumstances. Commenc- 
 ing at the lowest end of the scale of created beings, he avoids con- 
 fusing their minds by describing each grand division as monopo- 
 lizing an entire period of creation. 
 
 From the fourteenth to the nineteenth verse, inclusive, is em- 
 braced the fourth day of Creation or period of Evolution. 
 
 In the fourteenth verse we see reference made, for the first time, 
 
Psychogenesis. 153 
 
 to the celestial bodies, and the office of these iu regulating the sea- 
 sons, days (day in its true sense) and years. Here we have a re- 
 cognition of the fact that the dense mass of aqueous vapor, which 
 had previously enveloped the Earth, was breaking up and precip- 
 itating itself upon the surface of the Earth as rain, thus permitting 
 the Sun, Moon, and Stars to shed their rays upon the Earth. They 
 are thus said to have been created at this time, and, with reference 
 to the Earth, such was the fact. 
 
 The sixteenth verse is a reiteration and special recognition of 
 the office of the Sun and Moon. Reference is also made to the 
 stars in recognition of their light-giving power, though these also 
 had been previously created. This fourth day, therefore, involves 
 no creative act at all, for the sun, moon, and stars had been devel- 
 oped during the second period, but, in relation to the Earth, they 
 now begin to make their influence felt more conspicuously, and 
 are therefore said to have come into being at this time. 
 
 From the twentieth to the twenty-third verse, inclusive, is em- 
 braced the fifth day of creation. 
 
 Following out the plan adopted in describing the third day of 
 creation, Moses here refers to the creation of marine animal life as 
 a whole. He does not stop to explain that whales, sea-cows, por- 
 poises, and other Marine Mammalia, belonged to a much higher 
 order in the animal kingdom than the great mass of the inhabi- 
 tants of the waters, and that they did not come into existence until 
 a much later period. The Hebrew word which has been trans- 
 lated "whales" is literally rendered "stretched-out-sea-monsters," 
 which is a very good description of the huge lizards of early geo- 
 logic time. The Fowls of the air are next spoken of as having 
 been created, and with their creation the fifth day is said to end. 
 
 The sixth day of creation deals with the higher animals, and 
 Man, the crown and summit of terrestrial things, was created in 
 the image of his Maker. 
 
 Thus, whilst a scientific exposition does not permit the setting 
 apart of a whole period for the full development of each of the 
 grand divisions of animated nature, yet we can appreciate the 
 great truth that the method Moses adopted to impress the minds 
 of the people was the only one open to him, and that a more accu- 
 rate description would have defeated its own ends. 
 
 To sum up, Genesis and Modern Science agree in teaching — 
 
154 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 First. That in the beginning the immeasurable expanse of un- 
 bounded space was one vast vacuum, and that darkness rested 
 upon its bosom. 
 
 Second. That the atoms of matter are not self- existent, (un- 
 caused,) but were created. 
 
 Third. That these atoms were impressed by a law (universal 
 gravitation) which caused them to rush toward one another, and 
 that the resulting friction caused the evolution of heat and light. 
 
 Fourth. That the accumulation of matter at various points, under 
 the influence of this attractive energy, left vacant certain portions 
 of space, and thus the firmament came into being. 
 
 Fifth. That the globe on which we dwell was prepared for the 
 reception of higher and higher life by the gradual elevation of the 
 land above the waters. 
 
 Sixth. That the vegetable kingdom is lower in the scale of being 
 than the animal kingdom, and that its humbler representatives 
 preceded animal life on the globe. 
 
 Seventh. That an aqueous atmosphere of great thickness envel- 
 oped the Earth, and that its dissipation allowed the* sun, moon, 
 and stars to shed their full radiance upon the globe. 
 
 Eighth. That marine animal life, when taken in mass, is lower 
 in the scale of organization than land life, and that it came into 
 being before land animal life. 
 
 Ninth. That the fowls of the air hold an intermediate place be- 
 tween the great stretched-out sea monsters and the beasts (mam- 
 malia) of the field which were to come after. 
 
 Tenth. That these beasts of the field were the last of the lower 
 creation to come into being. 
 
 Eleventh. That man, though an animal in body, is endowed 
 with a nature which takes him beyond the sphere of the material, 
 and may, therefore, be said to image forth his non-material Creator. 
 
 That the narrative of man's residence in the Garden, and the 
 story of his temptation and fall, are to be looked upon as allegor- 
 ical is no longer denied by theologians. Eeference to the tree of 
 the knowledge of good and evil and to the tree of life compels us to 
 regard the whole as an allegory ; and, unless we are willing to 
 believe that moral and abstract truths may be of vegetable growth, 
 we must avoid a literal interpretation which does violence alike 
 
Psychogenesis. 155 
 
 to our intellect and the sublime truths which the allegory is in- 
 tended to convey. 
 
 This great allegory, whatever else it may teach, carries with it 
 a distinct enunciation of a truth which lies at the very foundation 
 of all true religion. It asserts in unmistakable language the free- 
 dom of the human will by recognizing the possibility of man's 
 Disobedience; and it furthermore unfolds to us the essential na- 
 ture of Sin, by showing that disobedience and sin are one and the 
 same. Thus, at the very threshold of religion, we are introduced 
 to the two cardinal truths upon which this religion must rest. We 
 are to regard ourselves as endowed with Freedom — free to obey 
 or disobey* Sin or moral evil can, therefore, exist only in a Free 
 Agent; destroy this freedom of action, and sin is destroyed; allow 
 freedom, and you recognize the possibility of disobedience, that is, 
 of sin. And thus we are taught to look upon sin not as an Entity 
 or Principle entering into the Constitution of the Universe, but as 
 a Condition — a condition of rebellion flowing from freedom of 
 action. How a creature can be endowed with freedom transcends 
 our comprehension ; but we know that moral responsibility can- 
 not exist without freedom. An automaton cannot be made re- 
 sponsible for its acts, for such acts are not the outcome of its own 
 independent volition, but the will of another working through it. 
 
 The grand mystery of our being lies here ; a mystery, the com- 
 prehension of which transcending reason is still confirmed by con- 
 sciousness. This conscious ability to do or not to do, to act or to 
 refrain from acting, is as much a part of man's make-up as the 
 consciousness of self-existence, and no man ever questioned it until 
 taught to do so by fallacious reasoning. As well might one attempt 
 to reason himself out of existence as to deny freedom of Will. 
 The Moral Evil or Sin above referred to is a very different thing 
 from that other kind of evil, called Physical Evil, which consists 
 in pain, suffering, and death. These occur in the established order 
 of nature, and are not to be regarded as things which ought not to 
 be. In a word, they are not evils, if we define evil as something 
 which should not exist. 
 
 * It goes without saying that man cannot be free in the Same Sense that the 
 Creator is free. Man's freedom is endowed or dependent ; that of the Creator 
 is unendowed. 
 
156 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Why physical suffering and death should enter into the consti- 
 tution of the world we cannot comprehend; but their Kightn ess 
 no one can question who believes in the existence of a Supreme 
 Beneficence. Suffering and death are often referred to in the 
 writings of the Apostles as following upon the commission of Sin ; 
 but we are not to understand that physical pain and death are here 
 meant, but moral pain and death. But these questions will be 
 further considered in another chapter. 
 
 The allegory of the Garden comes to us, then, freighted with 
 the most important revelations. It asserts the great truth of Man's 
 Freedom, upon which all religion must rest, and it teaches us to 
 recognize in Disobedience the true nature of Sin. 
 
 So long as men insist upon a literal interpretation of the Scrip- 
 tures, and think it impious to bring to its study the critical eye of 
 reason armed with all the revelations of science, so long will super- 
 stition envelope in its somber folds the radiant form of religion, 
 cutting off and absorbing its life-giving heat and light. 
 
 True religion and true science can never be in conflict ; both are 
 the offspring of the same Great Cause, and, when rightly inter- 
 preted, serve but to elucidate one another and to bring out the 
 truths of each in bolder relief. This thought is so beautifully 
 and eloquently expressed by an eminent clergyman,* in a little 
 book recently published, that the writer cannot do better than to 
 quote the whole passage: 
 
 " The strictest orthodoxy now holds what was damnable heresy 
 ten centuries or one century ago. The Universe was not created 
 in six solar days; the sun was not specially lighted up to illumi- 
 nate the earth; the planets are worlds and the stars are suns- 
 Men have burned for suggesting such things. Yet who doubts 
 them now, or what violence has been done to God's Word or its 
 inspiration? We read these truths clearly in Genesis. And shall 
 no more such opinions be given up as those which these truths 
 have displaced ? Shall a man be a heretic because he denies that 
 there were Iguanodons or seven Pterodactyles in the ark? Have 
 we reaped the full harvest of knowledge which lay potentially in 
 that seed of physical science which God sowed by the hand of 
 Moses ? No ; nor shall we through all the cycles of eternity, for 
 even glorified human intellect must be finite, and the harvest from 
 
 * " The Sower," by the Rev. Robert Wilson. 
 
Psychogenesis. 157 
 
 the seed of Divine truth must be infinite. That truth, bemg God's 
 truth, fears no other truth and antagonizes none, for all truth is of 
 God and shares alike the life of the Holy Ghost. Let true science 
 demonstrate — mark that word, demonstrate — what it may and it 
 will tear down some false interpretation of Holy Scripture to show 
 its new discovery gleaming in the mine where -God placed it when 
 Genesis became a sacred book." The opinions here so felicitously 
 expressed are now entertained by the most pious and most pro- 
 found theologians of the day. The champions of religion have too 
 often assumed an antagonistic attitude toward science, looking 
 upon its discoveries with fear or aversion, and utterly ignoring its 
 teachings. If the physical Universe were the handiwork of a 
 Demon they could not treat it with greater contempt. To such 
 minds the world is the embodiment of all evil, a fitting abode for 
 the powers of darkness, who range up and down in its fair fields, 
 blighting and destroying. They are either unmindful or ignorant 
 of the great truth, so clearl}' indicated in Genesis, that Sin as a 
 Principle in the Universe can have no existence, that it is merely 
 a condition of rebellion, the possibility of which becomes a neces- 
 sity of Freedom. Was the Devil forced to raise the standard of 
 revolt? If so, then the Devil is not responsible, and is, of all 
 creatures, the most to be pitied. 
 
 But in accepting the revelations of the material world, it be- 
 hooves us to discriminate well between true and false science. 
 Science is unified knowledge, the discovery of the relations which 
 bind together into an harmonious whole the detached facts of na- 
 ture. Much that passes current for science has no good claim to 
 that dignified title, being nothing more than the wild speculations 
 of unbalanced minds. It is marvelous what some people will 
 accept under the name of science, yet the same individuals laugh 
 in derision at revealed religion. 
 
 The false systems of thought which flood the world are the re- 
 sult of the false interpretations placed upon the truths of nature. 
 
 The materials out of which Mr. Spencer, with such labor, has 
 built his proud structure are taken from nature's quarries, and 
 each stone bears the seal of its great maker, but the architecture 
 and cement are from the hand of man alone, and the whole edifice 
 is faulty "from turret to foundation stone." " 
 
 I cannot bring this chapter to a close without touching upon a 
 
158 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 subject than which none greater can occupy the mind of a rational 
 being — that of the Soul's immortality. 
 
 The doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul comes to us from 
 out the dim shadows of the past, and is clearly indicated in the 
 Old Testament writings. This longing for a future life is cer- 
 tainly one of the noblest features of the human mind, and no age 
 nor people seems to have been entirely devoid of some notion of a 
 life after death. 
 
 Among the Hindoos, the doctrine of a future state assumed the 
 form of metempsychosis or transmigration, and this translation 
 from material tenement to material tenement was the fate of the 
 soul until it reached its highest state of development, when it at- 
 tained to Nirvana and became absorbed into the Divine Essence 
 of Brahm. 
 
 In the teachings of Prince Siddhartha, the founder of Buddhism, 
 the doctrine of transmigration plays a most important part. By 
 the purity of his life and the high spiritual elevation which he 
 thereby attained, Siddhartha became a Buddh, {%. e., the wise or 
 enlightened,) and it was given him to know the various lives 
 through which he had passed and also to realize the great truth 
 that his material pilgrimages were at an end — that he had reached 
 that degree of spiritual development which enables the soul to 
 exist without being united to material substance, thereby fitting 
 him to enter into Nirvana and become absorbed into the Divine 
 Essence. 
 
 Mr. Edwin Arnold has beautifully translated the triumphant 
 cry of Siddhartha when he had attained to his greatest enlighten- 
 ment : 
 
 Many a house of life 
 Hath held me — seeking ever Him who wrought 
 These prisons of the senses, sorrow fraught ; 
 Sore was my ceaseless strife ! 
 
 But now, 
 Thou builder of this tabernacle — Thou! 
 I know Thee ! Never shalt Thou build again 
 
 These walls of pain, 
 Nor raise the roof-tree of deceit, nor lay 
 
 Fresh rafters on the clay ; 
 Broken thy house is, and the ridge-pole split ! 
 
 Delusion fashion'd it! 
 Safe pass T thence — deliverance to obtain. 
 
Psychogenesis. 159 
 
 The purity of his life gained him many disciples, and before 
 his death the influence of his teachings was felt through the length 
 and breadth of India. He did not claim to be more than what all 
 other men might become, a Buddh, but the love and gratitude of 
 Asia elevated him into an object of worship. 
 
 The doctrine of transmigration and immortal destiny of the soul 
 was known to the early Greeks, who received it from the East. 
 
 But it was not until the days of Socrates and his disciple Plato, 
 that the doctrine of the immateriality and immortality of the soul re- 
 ceived the proudest vindication ever furnished by the uninspired 
 intellect of man. They anticipated all the arguments that have 
 been advanced since their time, and their clarified vision enabled 
 them to penetrate deeper into the mystery of things than any un- 
 inspired writer who has ever lived. 
 
 With the advent of Christ, a new era broke upon the world, and 
 the doctrine of the soul's immortality which, previous to His com- 
 ing, had been confined to a few great intellects, and never descended 
 to the masses, now received its final and complete vindication in 
 the inspired life and teachings of the Great Master and His disci- 
 ples. The impetus which His spirit gave to the civilization of the 
 world will not cease until mankind has been lifted to the highest 
 possible plane of development. 
 
 The favorite argument for the soul's immortality, and the one 
 most frequently insisted upon, is drawn from the immateriality of 
 its nature, but when this argument is carefully examined it will 
 be found to rest upon no certain foundation, for the same reason- 
 ing might be advanced to prove the immortality of all the laws of 
 the Material Universe, these being also immaterial in their nature. 
 The immortality of a thing in no wise depends upon its constitu- 
 tion, but upon the will of the Great First Cause, upon whom all 
 things are dependent ; His will, and His will only, can confer upon 
 them a never-ending existence. For aught we know, or have any 
 just reason to think, the matter which forms the basis of the phe- 
 nomenal Universe may be destined to exist forever. Even were 
 it conceded that the soul is material in its nature, it would not 
 be a necessary inference thence that the soul is destined to un- 
 dergo dissolution with the body. The immortality of the soul, 
 therefore, is in no wise concerned with its Materiality or Imma- 
 teriality. 
 
160 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 But if we cannot infer the eternal duration of the soul from its 
 immaterial nature, there are other arguments, independent of the 
 truths of revelation, which render it in the highest degree prob- 
 able. 
 
 Firstly. The irrepressible longing after a future state which is 
 common to all men in whom the moral faculties are at all devel - 
 oped, the intensity of the feeling being directly in proportion to 
 the elevation of the moral sense. 
 
 This moral principle is to be regarded as the true essence of the 
 soul, and is not to be confounded with mental power and attainments, 
 which are mere appendages. A soul dwarfed almost to nothing- 
 ness may be accompanied by the highest mental endowments, and 
 the most humble in intellectual power and attainments may pos- 
 sess a spiritual nature of the most exalted type. The peasant and 
 philosopher here meet on an equal footing — nay, the peasant may 
 be able to instruct his would-be wiser neighbor. 
 
 Secondly. The consciousness that there is something within us 
 which demands a more enduring existence than the short span of 
 a human life for its full development appeals to us with over- 
 whelming force. The old Greeks were so much influenced by this 
 feeling that they compared the soul and the stages of its develop- 
 ment with the stages of development of a butterfly ; and the fully- 
 developed insect was to them a symbol of the soul freed from its 
 earthy tenement. 
 
 Thirdly. The mere existence of this longing and this conscious- 
 ness in a highly-developed moral nature is positive evidence that 
 they have been placed there, directly or indirectly, by the Great 
 First Cause ; and this great truth must be looked upon as the 
 strongest argument for the eternal duration of the soul. The fact 
 that all men have no such yearnings in no wise militates against 
 the force of the argument; it only shows that they have not 
 reached that point of moral development. 
 
 "It must be so — Plato, thou reason'st well — 
 Else whence this pleasing hope, this fond desire, 
 This longing after immortality ? 
 Or whence this secret dread, and inward horror, 
 Of falling into nought? Why shrinks the soul 
 Back on herself, and startles at destruction ? 
 Tis the divinity that stirs within us ; 
 Tis Heav'n itself that points out an hereafter, 
 
Psychogenesis. 161 
 
 And intimates eternity to man. 
 
 ********* 
 
 The soul, secur'd in her existence, smiles 
 At the drawn dagger, and defies its point. 
 The stars shall fade away, the sun himself 
 Grow dim with age, and nature sink in years ; 
 But thou shalt flourish in immortal youth, 
 Unhurt amidst the war of elements, 
 The wreck of matter, and the crush of worlds. 
 
 11 
 
162 Evolution verstis Involution 
 
 Chapter IX. 
 
 Sociogenesis,* or The Evolution of Society. 
 
 Section 1. 
 
 A brief review of Society, and the Personal factor. 
 
 The laws of growth and development, which we have seen ex- 
 ercising such a potent influence in the material world in bringing 
 forth not only the globe upon which we dwell, but also the innu- 
 merable and varied forms of life which it sustains, have been no 
 less potent in bringing about that elaborate social structure which 
 the civilization of the nineteenth century presents. 
 
 In Government, in Science, in Art, in the practice of Morality, 
 and, indeed, throughout the whole social organism, we may trace 
 the action of the law of Evolution. There has been a gradual 
 but constant advance of the whole race from the earliest periods 
 down to our own times. 
 
 The contrast which the society of this age presents to that of the 
 past deepens as we go backward in time ; it is a steady decline 
 from the higher to the lower. The student of history, as he turns 
 over the records of the past, may be likened to a traveler, who, 
 starting from some lofty mountain region, gradually pursues his 
 way to the sea. He may, at intervals, meet with hill and dale, but 
 the general direction of the line of travel is one of descent. It is 
 only by bringing within the field of vision the histor}^ of humanity 
 as a whole that we are enabled to appreciate this sure and steady 
 advance from the earliest times. Were we to confine our gaze to 
 the civilization of one age or one nation, we might be able to trace 
 its rise, progress, and final extinction, and might be tempted to 
 deduce from this that the progress of the mass of humanity has 
 been made by sudden leaps. 
 
 It is only by traveling over the region with an observing eye, 
 
 * Lat. Socius, a companion ; and G-r. Genesis. 
 
Brief Review of Society. 163 
 
 and with the aid of scientific appliances, that the traveler learns 
 that a deep valley at the foot of the mountain chain may be much 
 more elevated above the sea-level than the high hill near the coast 
 So the student of history will learn that what was a high civiliza- 
 tion in one age may be absolutely much lower than the inferior 
 civilization of another. He will also learn to appreciate the fact 
 that the decadence of national greatness oftentimes furnishes the 
 materials out of which a loftier condition of things arises — that 
 civilization, disappearing in one age and nation, re-appears in 
 another, but on a grander scale. The civilization of the East was 
 followed by that of Greece, which, in its turn, was supplanted by 
 that of Rome ; from the debris of Roman greatness arose the 
 feudal system, and its decline made modern European civilization 
 possible. The discovery of a new continent furnished a fresh soil, 
 free from the noisome weeds of traditional belief, in which the 
 germs of free institutions, blown over from the Old World by the 
 storms of persecution, took a deep and firm root And now a 
 new era dawned upon the world ; a new civilization, such as the 
 world had never before seen, came into being. The slender sapling, 
 though rudely torn by the tempests which threatened to uproot it 
 at its first setting out, has grown into a mighty tree, under whose 
 benignant and wide-spreading branches the oppressed of all nations 
 may find a refuge and a home. But it has done far more than to 
 offer merely an asylum for the downtrodden ; the feelings of per. 
 sonal liberty, which it fosters, have made themselves felt through 
 the length and breadth of the mother-country, loosening the bonds 
 of autocratic rule and elevating the whole race to a higher plane 
 of development. 
 
 In forming an estimate of any civilization we must not be daz- 
 zled by the display of Individual genius which it may present, and 
 confound the National Elevation with Personal Elevation. The 
 monuments of literature, science, and art which a nation may pos- 
 sess are the products of Individual Greatness ; and the mass of 
 the people in whose midst these great works have been brought 
 forth may be so steeped in ignorance and superstition as to be 
 utterly unable to appreciate their possessions. Indeed, in such a 
 nation, the higher the Personal Elevation, the less u the probability 
 that it will work a beneficial influence upon the masses. The beacon, 
 which throws its rays afar, cannot be seen at the base of the tower ; 
 
164 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 we must remove some distance ere its slanting beams can reach 
 our eye, and the higher the elevation of the light the further must 
 we remove. The highest efforts of genius must have a kindred 
 mind to appreciate its loftier meanings ; hence it is that such men 
 are never appreciated by the masses of the age and nation which 
 have given them birth. The estimate in which such men are held 
 steadily advances with advancing civilization — the light which the 
 beacon emits is received by a greater number of eyes. Oftentimes 
 the rays reach the masses of the people, long ere they might other- 
 wise have done, by being refracted, as it were, by numerous inter- 
 mediate minds, who thus serve the purpose of interpreters. 
 
 The primary laws governing the production of Individual Ge- 
 nius are as obscure as the nature of the mind itself ; and the con- 
 genital factor, which enters so largely into the equation of life, can 
 never be determined. 
 
 Moses, Confucius. Plato, Aristotle, Copernicus, DesCartes, New- 
 ton, Shakspeare, Milton, and a host of others, seem to spring up 
 spontaneously, and oftentimes in spite of the most adverse cir- 
 cumstances. 
 
 We have seen that in Mass Genius, or civilization, the ascent has 
 been gradual from the remotest antiquity up to the present time, 
 but nearly the reverse has been the case with Individual Genius. 
 
 That the past ages of the world furnish examples of personal 
 greatness which more modern times cannot equal, no one who is 
 competent to judge will deny. And this is true in every depart- 
 ment of human effort, in philosophy, science, art, government, &c. 
 We have, indeed, men of high mental caliber in our times, but the 
 greatest among them -are the first to acknowledge the immeasurable 
 superiority of those who have gone before. Nor are such feelings 
 the offspring of a sentimental reverence for what is old, but the 
 result of a calm and judicious estimate of the relics of past ages, 
 which have been diligently compared with the products of more 
 modern times. The accumulated experience of centuries is indeed 
 ours, but the mere possession of knowledge does not make great 
 men. 
 
 Shakspeare, were he suddenly to appear among us, would be 
 put to the blush by the merest school-boy, but who of our own 
 times would be selected to measure mental strength with his? 
 Newton might, with profit, enter himself as a pupil of one of our 
 
Brief Review of Society. 165 
 
 ordinary schools, but there is not a man living to-day who is 
 worthy to unloose the latchet of his shoe. With what dazed won- 
 der would our own Franklin behold the feats of an ordinary and 
 otherwise ignorant electrician of the year 1884 ! Indeed, if all 
 those intellectual giants who are the crowning glory of the race 
 should suddenly appear amongst us, they could all be traught by 
 every blockhead who had penetrated beyond the portals of one of 
 our institutions of learning. Imagine Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, 
 Galen, Copernicus, Galileo, Francis Bacon, Newton, &c, gathered 
 around a fledgling from one of our universities, drinking in words 
 of wisdom ! Absurd as such a picture appears, it is nevertheless 
 true that they would all learn much that they never even dreamed 
 of before. 
 
 Whole sciences have come into being since they lived, and much 
 of the knowledge with which they were acquainted and, did so 
 much to establish, has been revolutionized to such an extent that 
 they would be dumbfounded. Yet not one of the names above- 
 mentioned has a living equal. From this we may recognize the 
 truth that whilst the average genius of the race has been steadily 
 advancing to a higher level by virtue of its accumulated inherit- 
 ance, individual genius never attains to those lofty heights which 
 past ages of the world brought forth. It seems as if individual 
 greatness is being swallowed up by mass greatness, and this be- 
 comes more and more apparent as civilization advances. Besides 
 the very important and obscure congenital factor already referred 
 to, it is possible that one explanation of this gradual decline of 
 the Individual may be found in the methods of instruction which 
 prevail at the present day. The young are overladened with facts 
 the relations of which they cannot grasp, and all their mental 
 vigor is exhausted in retaining these in the mind to the curtail- 
 ment of the exercise of the reasoning powers. They succed, in- 
 deed, in accumulating an immense mass of facts, but they fail to 
 digest and assimilate it, and, instead of nourishing and strength- 
 ening, the intellect is really weakened and overpowered by it. The 
 methods of instruction which produced the great men of Greece 
 and the Eenaissance were carried on in very different fashion. 
 Then men of genius alone assumed to themselves the office of 
 teachers, and they succeeded in infusing into their pupils some- 
 what of the spirit by which they themselves were moved. The 
 
166 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 reason was appealed to at every step, and every faculty of the 
 mind was subjected to a thorough and judicious training. After 
 passing through such a mental gymnasium, they were prepared to 
 grapple with the great problems of the intellect, of whatever na- 
 ture they might be. Hence, they became what might be termed 
 Universal Men, and the whole field of knowledge became the 
 scene of their operations. 
 
 Another explanation of the gradual decline in the number of 
 such men may be discovered in the constant widening of the field 
 of knowledge, rendering it more and more difficult for a single 
 mind to compass the whole. Students of special branches thus 
 became more and more numerous as knowledge extended its limits. 
 In concentrating all their powers on special studies, a tremendous 
 impetus was given to the progress of knowledge, but this general 
 advance was- made at the sacrifice of the Individual ; for now the 
 scope of his vision became narrowed down to his own specialty, 
 and the close relationship and independence existing among all 
 branches of science could no longer be fully appreciated. In quite 
 recent times a few great generalizers have arisen, who, skimming 
 over the vast field, have attempted to unify knowledge into a co- 
 herent mass, and to discover the relations existing throughout the 
 whole. But such efforts have always been attended by a great 
 sacrifice of original investigation and discovery. The two greatest 
 generalizers of this century are August Comte and Herbert Spen- 
 cer, the latter having followed the lead of the former. But neither 
 of these men are known as original investigators, and they have 
 in no sense added to the sum of human knowledge. Making use 
 of the materials which others have supplied with such painstaking 
 labor, they have built up their systems. Even the architectural 
 plans followed are not original with them, but the result of the 
 labors of men far abler than they. 
 
 It will be seen, therefore, that one of the factors which goes to 
 make truly great men is necessarily absent in modern times. A 
 man cannot hope to be both a great generalizer and a great original 
 investigator at one and the same time ; one must inevitably be sac- 
 rificed to the other. Hence, the original germs of genius can 
 never receive that double nutrition which might insure its develop- 
 ment to those imposing heights which past ages of the world offer 
 for our contemplation. 
 
Brief Review of Society. 167 
 
 It is not easy to conceive, taking a random case which might be 
 multiplied indefinitely, how a man of the same magnitude of Leo- 
 nardo da Vinci could be produced by our own times. Philoso- 
 pher, scientist, architect, painter, sculptor, and engineer, he mani- 
 fested an aptitude for all which would place him at the head of 
 these different branches were he living to-day. He not only mas- 
 tered all the knowledge then known in these various departments, 
 but he extended the limits of each by original work. As a painter, 
 he ranked among the first of his own time, and the fresco of the 
 Lord's Supper in the refectory of a convent at Milan, though 
 marred by the hand of time and vandalism, still bears testimony 
 to his transcendent genius. As an architect, he was only second to 
 his great contemporary, Michael Angelo ; and as a philosopher 
 and practical scientist, he stood among the first of that age. The 
 historian Hallam thus sums up his scientific acquirements : " The 
 discoveries which made Galileo, and Kepler, and other names illus- 
 trious, the system of Copernicus, the very theories of recent geol- 
 ogers, are anticipated by Da Vinci within the compass of a very 
 few pages. ***** jj e fi rs t laid down the grand prin- 
 ciple of Bacon, that experiment and observation must be the guide 
 to just theory." 
 
 This picture, it must be confessed, is somewhat overdrawn. The 
 grand principle of Bacon which Hallam refers to was fully recog- 
 nized by Albertus Magnus and Roger Bacon, and is very clearly 
 laid down by Aristotle at the very commencement of his " Physics." 
 As to his anticipating the discoveries of Copernicus, Galileo, and 
 Kepler, that is only partially true, for he failed to subject his the- 
 ories to the test of mathematical demonstration ; or, if he did, such 
 proofs have not come down to us. But there is sufficient evidence 
 that he did make discoveries in physical science important enough 
 to distinguish him as one of the first men of his day. 
 
 Da Vinci is but one of many names that might be mentioned 
 that united such vast acquirements with such wonderful power 
 for original investigation. Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler are 
 illustrations. Copernicus was probably one of the most eminent 
 physicians of his day, as he certainly was the greatest mathemati- 
 cian and astronomer. 
 
 We have thus good reason for believing that the conditions for 
 producing great men are not so favorable as they once were ; one 
 
168 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 of the chief factors is developed at the expense of the other, hence 
 failure to attain the same high and even development. Given 
 the same original mental. power, and surround it by the best con- 
 ditions which prevailed in Greece, or which existed in modern 
 Europe from the twelfth to the seventeenth centuries, and it will 
 attain to greater heights than if it were surrounded by the best 
 conditions of the nineteenth. 
 
 We may draw a parallel between a mind so circumstanced and 
 a boy reared to great expectations and the same boy curtailed 
 somewhat in his worldly prospects. The child who is brought up 
 in the lap of luxury, pampered and indulged by adoring parents, 
 and not permitted to ask in vain, will, in nine cases out of ten, 
 whatever be his original powers, turn out a worthless or, at best, 
 a very mediocre man. The wholesome discipline which mental 
 effort and self-renunciation bring will have no place in the forma- 
 tion of his character, and the virtues which spring from such dis- 
 cipline will either be entirely wanting or very much dwarfed. On 
 the other hand, the same child with more discreet training, who 
 has been taught that in a measure he is to be the " architect of his 
 own. fortunes," might have become a brilliant light in his da}' and 
 generation. 
 
 It has been very felicitously said by an eminent writer that 
 genius is a plant which only grows in rocky ground. It is true 
 that if the soil be too rocky the plant may be deprived of the moist- 
 ure necessary for its growth, or be unable to withstand the violence 
 of the storm ; in the one case, its tender roots will be shriveled by 
 the withering droughts, and, in the other be uprooted and carried 
 on the wings of the tempest. 
 
 It is a notorious fact that the lives of the great majority of 
 those who have attained to extraordinary intellectual excellence, 
 and who have made good their claim to this distinction by their 
 great achievements in philosophy, science, literature, and art, pre- 
 sent us with a series of pictures in which the shadows, at least in 
 their younger days, predominate over the lights. The history of 
 the race abounds in instances where genius has been elicited by 
 the wan caresses of Poverty that might otherwise have been 
 smothered in the lap of Luxury. Some of the most brilliant gems 
 of our literature we owe to efforts to stave off the pangs of hunger ; 
 and it is not too much to assert that these would never have seen 
 
Brief Review of Society. 169 
 
 the light had their authors been indulged and pampered by for- 
 tune. Dr. Johnson used to confess that he was so indolent by 
 nature that he would never have written a line had not poverty 
 urged him on; and we may safely affirm that neither the " Wan- 
 derer " nor " Kambler," much less the Dictionary, would ever have 
 been produced had he been born with a silver spoon in his mouth 
 and fanned by the downy wings of luxury. 
 
 Shakspeare's stores of wealth would never have been poured out 
 had not the iron goad pricked him on. The "Vicar of Wake- 
 field" and the "Deserted Village" would not have brought tears 
 to the eyes of tens of thousands had Oliver Goldsmith been the 
 child of wealth. 
 
 But the most favorable conditions for the development of genius 
 are found where the lights and shadows are equally blended ; 
 where the obstacles to be overcome are just sufficient to call forth 
 a healthy exercise of the mental faculties ; where Fortune is neither 
 too coy nor yet too bold, but "discreetly wise." 
 
 Luxury and mental decadence follow one another as inevitably 
 as the shadow its substance ; and in this great truth we may con- 
 template a wise provision of nature. For, were it otherwise, did 
 not the wealth amassed by the mental acumen of one generation 
 entail a certain degree of intellectual degradation on the next the 
 equilibrium of society would be seriously disturbed. The double 
 inheritance of wealth and mental power would tend to augment 
 one another from generation to generation, and the gulf separating 
 the few fortunate ones from their more numerous less fortunate 
 fellows would be constantly widening and with increasing rapidity. 
 The higher the elevation of the few, the deeper would become the 
 degradation of the many. In monarchical institutions, where it is 
 deemed necessary to have a privileged class intermediate between 
 the monarch and the people, the intellectual deficiencies of this 
 privileged class, which would soon insure the dissipation of accu- 
 mulated wealth, is compensated for by special enactments on the 
 part of the State. The State thus takes the part of a parent to- 
 ward this class, shielding them from the effects of their own im- 
 becility. Were this support withdrawn, the aristocracies of Europe 
 would crumble into nothing in a few generations. 
 
 Through the working of this all-important law, for so it may be 
 termed, of the dissipation of mental energy under the influence of 
 
170 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 luxury, the condition of society at large is ameliorated and an even 
 development assured. The wealth power of the one is neutralized 
 by the intellectual power of the other, and the individuals repre- 
 senting these classes are constantly changing their relations. This 
 healthy circulation insures the normal growth of the social organ- 
 ism as a whole and prevents decay. 
 
 But let us return to the parallel we were about to draw in illus- 
 tration of the fact that modern times do not offer the same ad- 
 vantages for the growth of Individual Genius as former ages of 
 the world. The immense accumulation of knowledge, handed 
 down from generation to generation, renders it more and more 
 difficult for the individual to grasp the whole. Of the utter hope- 
 lessness of mastering all knowledge, his first initiation soon con- 
 vinces him. The student, therefore, selects some special branch, 
 and cultivates this to the almost entire exclusion of every other 
 department. This tendency to specialize, to concentrate all the 
 powers upon one point, to the neglect of a wider survey of the 
 field of nature, steadily increases with the advance of knowledge. 
 The few who do aspire to a wider view must give up all hope of 
 original investigation, and devote all their strength to the compre- 
 hension and interpretation of the discoveries of others. The ac- 
 tion of wealth of knowledge in thus discouraging the development 
 of one of the two principal factors which nourish genius may very 
 well be compared to the degrading influence which pecuniary 
 wealth exercises upon the mind. In former ages, the world was 
 poorer in knowledge, and the mind, which to-day is confined to a 
 single branch, or dissipated over an immeasurable field, would then 
 have been engaged in the practical study of the whole field of 
 nature as then known, and would thus derive the double advantage 
 which original investigation and a wide range of vision afford. 
 The mind so conditioned would naturally attain to greater strength ; 
 and a glance at the great names which grace the past history of 
 the world will furnish indisputable proof of this. That there are 
 many other factors which enter into the production of great genius 
 is beyond question, but those referred to appeal to the writer with 
 peculiar force. The decline of Individual Greatness with the ad- 
 vance of Mass Greatness seems as well marked in the domain of 
 Literature and the arts as in that of philosophy. 
 
 We have a greater number of writers, painters, and sculptors 
 
Brief Review of Society. 171 
 
 than at any other period of the world's history, but they never at- 
 tain to the same degree of excellence that distinguished earlier 
 times. The museums of Europe are filled with specimens of an- 
 tique art which bear witness to the superior genius of the ancients 
 over the moderns. It must be confessed that many of these works 
 are even superior to anything the Renaissance produced ; and 
 Michael Angelo, the greatest sculptor of that period, was the first 
 to recognize the superior excellence of the ancients. The fire that 
 burned so brightly in his own bosom was nourished and strength- 
 ened by the study and contemplation of the works of antiquity. 
 In the Vatican collection there is still to be seen a mutilated mar- 
 ble which bears the name of the Torso of Michael Angelo, be- 
 cause it had been an object of constant study to the great sculptor. 
 Of the specimens of antique art which have always defied the 
 competition of later times, may be noted the Apollo, Antinous, 
 and Laocoon of the Vatican collection ; the Venus de Medici of 
 the Florentine, and the Venus de Milo of the Louvre; the Dying 
 Gladiator of the Capitol of Rome, and the Farnese Hercules and 
 Farnese Bull of the Museo Barbonico, at Naples. Yet these are 
 the productions of a time when art was on the decline in Greece. 
 Some of the works above mentioned are copies of originals pro- 
 duced at a much earlier period. 
 
 Of the painting of the Greeks and Romans, nothing remains but 
 a few frescoes. The perishable nature of canvas is such that the 
 absence of all remains of ancient painting is not surprising ; but 
 that they had attained to a high degree of excellence there can be 
 no doubt. Many fine Mosaics have been discovered, and we know 
 that this peculiar art could not have arrived at such perfection had 
 not painting reached a high degree of excellence. The celebrated 
 Mosaic of Darius at the battle of Arbela, found' at Pompeii, and 
 now in the museum at Naples, is a work of wonderful power and 
 skill. But in addition to such proofs, we have the testimony of 
 the famous writers of Greece and Rome, who were excellent judges 
 of art, and familiar with the finest sculpture and most beautiful 
 architecture. It is fpir to presume, therefore, that their extravagant 
 praises of the painting of their day were not without some founda-» 
 tion in fact. Thus we are told that as early as 718 B. C, a paint- 
 ing by Bularchus was purchased by Candaules, King of Lydia, 
 for its weight in gold. From his time the art continued to improve 
 
172 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 until it reached its climax in the person of Apelles, about the 
 third century B. C. A Venus painted by him was regarded as 
 the most faultless production of Grecian genius, and was purchased, 
 long after the artist's death, for one hundred talents (nearly $100,000) 
 by the Emperor Augustus. 
 
 The anecdote related of the two celebrated rivals, Zeuxis and 
 Parrhasius, who flourished about 450 B. C, is familiar to almost 
 every one. 
 
 There is scarcely room for doubt, therefore, that the ancients ex- 
 celled in Painting as much as they did in Sculpture. But whether 
 the painting of Greece surpassed that of the Renaissance or not, it 
 is certain that the Renaissance far excelled our own time ; and of 
 this we have abundant proof in the collections of modern Europe. 
 Our artists are weaklings compared with the giants of the past, and 
 if this is exhibited in their works, what a vast inferiority there 
 must be in mental power ! But if Personal Genius for art no longer 
 attains to those heights which it once did, the appreciation of the 
 masses, mass genius, is far greater than it once was ; and this is 
 proved by the wonderful multiplication of private and public col- 
 lections, and the increased number of artists. In architecture, the 
 remains of ancient temples still attest their genius ; and everything 
 that is beautiful in our own has been drawn from that of Greece. 
 
 If we turn to literature where will we find evidence of such ex- 
 alted genius as the literature of Greece and Rome afford? Stand- 
 ing on the very verge of the historical horizon, we behold Homer 
 and Hesiod. The Illiad has furnished the model upon which all 
 the great epic poems have been fashioned since Homer's day. 
 From its wild and luxuriant vegetation has been culled the fairest 
 flowers which deck the trim parterres of later poets. It is doubt- 
 ful if our own gi'eat Milton would have attained to his sublime 
 heights had not his genius been fostered by the blind bard of Greece. 
 But in sublimity Homer must give way to the Hebrew poets, Job 
 and Isaiah, and it was from the study of these that Milton learned 
 to soar above the old Greek to whom he owed so much. 
 
 The ideas which the author has attempted to bring out in the 
 preceding pages may be illustrated by the following diagram and 
 table. 
 
 A glance at the diagram will show that, whilst the plane of Per- 
 sonal Genius has been a descending one, the plane of Mass Genius, 
 
1769 
 1770 
 1773 
 1773 
 1775 
 
 names associated 
 the movement. 
 
 with 
 
 H decline of personal genius ; the line B 
 
 f their age and country. As nothing 
 an of surpassing genius, has descended 
 ss in these directions is indeterminable, 
 pis, that of the military commander is 
 rere all notoriously deficient in every- 
 Seience, or Art, but his moral character 
 
 ^M^MMI 
 
DIAGRAM AND TABLE SHOWING THE RELATION BETWEEN MASS GENIUS OR CIVILIZATION AND PERSONAL GENIUS. 
 
 Early and Mddle later Greek With Am Dawn of Bornoeiwem Bomoeiween „ . m . 
 
 Alexandrian and Roman. Renaissance, 1JJB0 and 1660. 1660 and 1776. Bom since 1776 
 
 Descending Line of Personal Genius. 
 
 first leoonloil :i] iJ)1i--;l1 i> -n 
 
 of gunpowder to the 
 art of war; Creasy, 
 13+ii. Invention of 
 printing in Europe by 
 Guttenberg, KomI.it, 
 Faust and Schoffer, 
 about 1450. 
 
 / Mas 
 
 THE MASSES 
 
 First known application 
 of steam to navigation 
 by De Garay, lot.;. 
 
 le steam engines of Sav- 
 arv, 1008, and of \cw- 
 eomen, 1710. First ap- 
 plication of electricity 
 in telegraphy by Dr. 
 Watson, 17-17, LaSage, 
 1774, Sulva, 1790; 
 Soemmering, 1811. 
 
 Cent, B. 0. 
 
 Homer 10 & 9 
 
 Hesiod, 10 k 9 
 
 Thales, 7 
 
 Anaximander 6 
 
 Pythagoras, 6 
 
 Aeschylus 6 & 5 
 
 Pindar & 5 
 
 Herodotus, 5 
 
 Phidias, 5 
 
 PolVL'HOtUS. 5 
 
 Paruiemdes 5 
 
 Heraclitus 5 
 
 Euripides 5 
 
 Sophocles, 5 
 
 Socrates, 5 & 4 
 
 Hippocrates, . . . . 5 & 4 
 
 Plato, 5 & 4 
 
 Thucidides 5 & 4 
 
 Empedocles, 5 & 4 
 
 Zeno, of Elea 5 & 4 
 
 Xenophon, 5i4 
 
 Scopas 4 
 
 Zeuxis, 4 
 
 Apelles, 4 
 
 Aristotle, 4 
 
 Pyrrho, 4 
 
 Aristophanes, 4 
 
 Parrhasius 4 
 
 Praxitiles, 4&3 
 
 Epicurus, 4 & 3 
 
 /!. C. 
 
 Euclid, 3 
 
 Archimedes, 3 
 
 Hipparchus, 2 
 
 Terence. 2 
 
 Cicero, 1 
 
 Lucretius, 1 
 
 Catullus, 1 
 
 Sallust, 1 
 
 Virgil, 1 
 
 Horace, 1 
 
 B. C. & A. D. 
 
 Ovid, 1 & 1 
 
 Livy, 1 & 1 
 
 Seneca, 1 & 1 
 
 Celsus, 1 & 1 
 
 Glycon, 1 & 1 
 
 Apollonius, 1 & 1 
 
 .1. D. 
 
 Agesander, 1 
 
 Zcnodorus 1 
 
 Tacitus, 1 
 
 Pliny, 1 
 
 Philo, 1 
 
 Lucanus, 1 
 
 Galen 2 
 
 Ptolemy 2 
 
 Plotinus, 3 
 
 Augustine, 3 
 
 From the Fourth Century 
 to the Thirteenth is em- 
 braced that dark period, 
 the middle ages, during 
 which personal genius 
 seemed to slumber.— 
 What there was of orig- 
 inal investigation was 
 almost entirely confined 
 to the Arabians, who 
 made great advances in 
 Medicine and the Scien- 
 ces upon which it is 
 based. Philosophy, 
 
 Mathematics, and As- 
 tronomy were also cul- 
 tivated with success. 
 The following are some 
 of the names most not- 
 ed among them: 
 
 Al-Mansur, 8 
 
 Albumazar, 8 & 9 
 
 lihazes 9 & 10 
 
 Alfarabi, 9& In 
 
 Ali-Abbas 10 
 
 Avieeiina In & 11 
 
 Alghazali 11 & 12 
 
 Avenzoar 11 & 12 
 
 Edrisi 11 & 12 
 
 Abulkasim, .... 11 & 12 
 
 Aben-Kzra 12 
 
 Averrocs 12 
 
 Born. 
 
 Alain de Lille 1114 
 
 Albertus Magnus, . . 1205 
 
 Roger Bacon, 121 4 
 
 Aquinas 1227 
 
 Raymond Lully, . . . 1235 
 Arnoldus de Villa 
 
 Nova 1235 
 
 Cimabue 12411 
 
 Cecco d'Ascoli, .... 1257 
 
 Dante, 1205 
 
 Duns Scotus, 1205 
 
 Pisano 1270 
 
 Giotto 1270 
 
 ThomasBradwnrdine 1290 
 
 I'ctrarcl 1304 
 
 Boccaccio 1313 
 
 Chaucer, 1328 
 
 Van Eyclc, 1300 
 
 Ghiberti 1380 
 
 Donatello 1383 
 
 Born. 
 
 Leonardo DaVin, i, . 1452 
 
 Albert Durer 1471 
 
 Copernicus, 1473 
 
 Ariosto 1474 
 
 Michael Angelo 1474 
 
 Titian 1477 
 
 Raffaelle, 1483 
 
 Luther, 1483 
 
 Corregio, 1494 
 
 Holbein 1498 
 
 Benvenuto Chellini, . 1500 
 
 Tintoretto, 1512 
 
 Camoens 1525 
 
 Tasso, 1544 
 
 Spenser 1553 
 
 Cervantes 1547 
 
 Francis Bacon 1501 
 
 Galileo, 1504 
 
 Shakspere, 1504 
 
 Paul Veronese 1530 
 
 Rubens, 1577 
 
 Kepler, 1571 
 
 Harvey 1578 
 
 lies Cartes 1590 
 
 Corueille 1000 
 
 Milton 1008 
 
 Salvator Rosa 1015 
 
 Murillo 1018 
 
 Spinoza, 1032 
 
 Locke 1032 
 
 Addison, 1032 
 
 Dryden 1031 
 
 Racine 1039 
 
 Newton 1042 
 
 Leibnitz 1040 
 
 Rousseau, 1070 
 
 Swift, 1077 
 
 Berkeley, 1084 
 
 Pope 1688 
 
 Richardson, 1G80 
 
 Voltaire 1094 
 
 Thompson, 1700 
 
 Linmcus 1707 
 
 Johnson, 1709 
 
 Button 1707 
 
 Hume 1711 
 
 Kant, 1724 
 
 Goldsmitl 1728 
 
 Reynolds, 1723 
 
 Gibbon 1737 
 
 Galvani, 1737 
 
 Ilerschcl 1738 
 
 West, 1738 
 
 Condorcet, 1743 
 
 Franklin 1700 
 
 Lamarck 1744 
 
 Laplace, 1749 
 
 Goethe, 1740 
 
 Schiller, 1759 
 
 David 1748 
 
 Flaxman 1755 
 
 Canova, 1757 
 
 Danneker 1758 
 
 Opii, 1701 
 
 Humboldt, 17G9 
 
 Cuyier, 1709 
 
 Thorwaldsen, 1770 
 
 young 1773 
 
 Priestly 1773 
 
 Turner, 1775 
 
 Since 1775 many great men 
 have been born who have 
 enriched philosophy, sci- 
 enee, Literature, and art; 
 but whilst they have ex- 
 ceeded in number, they 
 have fallen far short in 
 mental power, those of 
 the preceding ages. The 
 rapid strides which civili- 
 zation has made during 
 the past century are 
 largely due to the suc- 
 cessful application of 
 Watt's discoveries ; to lo- 
 comotion by Frevethiek, 
 1804, and Stephenson, 
 1814; to navigation by 
 Fulton, 1807. The dis- 
 covery of electro-mag- 
 netism by Oersted and 
 Ampere, 1820, paved the 
 way for the present sys- 
 tems of telegraphy. In 
 the year 1837, the first 
 general andsuccessful in- 
 troduction of telegraphy 
 took place. Morse, Stein- 
 liil, Wheatstone, and 
 Cooke are the chief 
 with 
 
 the movement. 
 
 The vertical lines mark the relative heights to which individual genius attained at various periods of the world's history. The line A shows the gradual decline of personal genius; the line B 
 the gradual ascent of civilization or mass genius. 
 
 This table embraces a few of the great men who have illustrated the history of the world, and whoso personal efforts entitle them to rank the first of their age and country. As nothing 
 is known of Individual effort prior to the Early Greek period, the Personal Genius of that early time cannot he estimated. Moses, though no doubt a man of surpassing genius, has descended 
 to us as an inspired teacher and Lawgiver. The names of other great Lawgivers and Rulers are omitted, for the individual equation which insures success in these directions is indeterminable, 
 and the influence of the laws of Evolution are more discernible. Nor ore names distinguished lor exploits in war mentioned, for, of all orders of genius, that of the military commander is 
 the lowest, depending more upon favoring circumstances ami action than upon mental power ami attainments. Marlborough, Nelson, and Wellington were all notoriously deficient in every- 
 thing that constitutes mental excellence. Napoleon I was undoubtedly a man of great mental power, and might have attained distinction in Philosophy, Science, or Art, but his moral character 
 was blackened by every degrading vice. 
 
Brief Review of Society. 173 
 
 or Civilization, has been an ascending one. The highest Individual 
 elevation lies in the past ; the highest Mass elevation lies in the 
 present. 
 
 Thus the dawn of history presents us with Man, intellectually 
 considered, at his best. This truth might be interpreted as mili- 
 tating against the theory of Evolution, but that this would not be 
 a legitimate inference the writer will endeavor to show. 
 
 The doctrine of Evolution, as expounded in these pages, asserts 
 Material Continuity from the Bioplasm which forms the main trunk 
 (see chart) of the tree of Life up to Man. It affirms that each 
 succeeding generation of individuals along this line was a little 
 higher than its predecessor. It affirms that this constant growth 
 was in obedience to Involved or Superimposed Laws. It affirms 
 that when the animal had attained to that height which led it to 
 seek after the Author of its being, then the Soul became manifest 
 (or evolved) upon the Earth. When, in obedience to these laws, 
 the Man Animal developed into the Man Intellectual and pro- 
 gressed in civilization to a point which enabled him to appreciate 
 the full significance of a revelation, then that revelation was made 
 to him. If there has been a revelation made to man by his Maker, 
 (and that there has been I will endeavor to prove further on,) it is 
 not too much to assume that the first human being so favored, 
 must have been endowed, in a very remarkable degree, with those 
 faculties termed Intellectual. 
 
 I will now proceed to show that, reasoning from analogy, we 
 may justly assume that Adam, or the first man to whom a direct 
 revelation was made, is to be regarded as the highest Intellectual 
 type of his kind. I may say just here, by way of caution, that 
 we must not confound Intellectual Power with Intellectual Attain- 
 ments. There are many men of the present generation who have 
 greater attainments (more knowledge of facts) than any of past 
 generations, but they fall short in mental power. It is not neces- 
 sary to assume, therefore, that Adam possessed a knowledge of 
 facts equal to that of men now living, but that he did possess a 
 higher degree of producing power, the test of intellectual superi- 
 ority, we may well believe. 
 
 The study of the fossil remains found in the rocky strata of the 
 earth, reveals the fact that the various classes of animals with 
 which we are now acquainted reached their acme, both in size and 
 
174 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 numbers, in past geologic time. Origin, growth, and declension 
 mark the history of all. 
 
 Thus the Reptilian class, taking its origin in the latter part of 
 the Palaeozoic, reached its culminating point in the Mesozoic. 
 "Never in the history of the earth, before or since," says a distin- 
 guished geologist, "did this class reach so high a point in numbers, 
 variety of form, size, or elevation in the scale of organization." 
 The same may be said of birds, mammals, and all other classes of 
 animals. The mammalian class took its rise at the beginning of 
 the Mesozoic and culminated in the huge mastadons, &c, of the 
 Cenozoic. Man is, indeed, classed among the mammals by the 
 naturalist, but man regarded simply as an animal is immeasurably 
 inferior to many existing brutes. What the huge reptiles, birds, 
 and mammals were to the eras in which they flourished in such 
 vast numbers and attained such enormous size, that the man Adam 
 was to the Race Intellectually. We may safely assume that the 
 human race had gradually developed in intellectual strength until 
 it attained its maximum in the Man, to whom a direct revelation 
 was given. 
 
 We know that Intellectual greatness, in the individual, is on the 
 decline; hence we must look to the past to find the highest type. 
 
 That there existed on the earth a pre- Adamite race, from which 
 Adam himself was descended, seems to be indicated in the fourth 
 chapter Genesis, fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth verses. 
 
 The preceding verses narrate the birth of Cain and Abel, and 
 the quarrel between them which resulted in the murder of Abel. 
 No reference is made to any other children of Adam and Eve, and 
 we are left to infer that at this time Cain and Abel were the only 
 children they possessed; yet in the fourteenth verse we have as 
 follows : 
 
 14. Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of 
 the earth ; and from thy face shall I be hid ; and I shall be a fugi- 
 tive and a vagabond in the earth ; and it shall come to pass that 
 EVERY ONE that jindeth me shall slay me. 
 
 15. And the Lord said unto him, therefore whosoever slayeth * 
 Cain vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the Lord 
 set a mark on Cain, lest any rinding him should kill him. 
 
 16. And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and 
 dwelt in the land of Nod, (land of wandering,) on the East of Eden. 
 
Brief Review of Society. 175 
 
 17. And Cain knew his wife [Where did he get her? We are 
 not told that Adam had any daughters at this time] and she con- 
 ceived, &c. 
 
 Again, the first and second verses of the sixth chapter seem to 
 furnish further evidence of a pre- Adamite race. 
 
 1. And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the 
 face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them — 
 
 2. That the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they 
 were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 
 
 This last verse, altogether inexplicable on the supposition that 
 Adam was literally the first man on the earth, receives a rational 
 explanation if we assume that the earth was already peopled at 
 the time when he appears on the scene. We may now interpret 
 the phrase " the sons of God" as referring to the descendants of 
 Adam, and the phrase "the daughters of Men" as referring to the 
 descendants of the wandering hordes which peopled the earth. 
 
 In the foregoing pages I have attempted to give a rational ex- 
 planation of the decline of individual genius, and, in the table of 
 names, have appealed to history to support the argument. That 
 table does not run back anterior to the dawn of Greek civilization, 
 as we have no remains of individual effort prior to that time ex- 
 cept what is embalmed in the Bible and other religious and moral 
 works. 
 
 From a study of many of the Old Testament writings we may 
 gather, that the men who produced them were of the highest order 
 of genius, whether we regard them as directly inspired or not. 
 We may safely affirm, then, that Man, individually considered, 
 presents us with higher and higher intellectual power as we ascend 
 in antiquity, culminating in him who first received a direct reve- 
 lation from on High. Whilst, therefore, we may regard Adam as 
 the highest type of man Intellectually considered, yet humanity 
 did not reach its maximum point in him ; still another and higher 
 type was to be unfolded. Intellectual grandeur must give place 
 to Moral or Spiritual grandeur. The last and highest type of 
 humanity found its fulfilment in the Second or Spiritual Adam. 
 As the first Adam was the type of Man Intellectual, so the Sec- 
 ond Adam was the type of Man Spiritual. In the person of Jesus 
 Christ we behold the complete Evolvement of the Supreme Will 
 in its relation to Man in this state of beins;. Bend our faculties 
 
176 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 to their utmost, we can conceive of no higher life than that which 
 the Personality of Christ offers for our contemplation. 
 
 From the days of Christ to our own times we may trace a gradual 
 decline of Spirituality in the Individual. But this Individual 
 retrogression has been attended by Mass progression ; and, if the 
 peaks are not so high, the valleys are not so deep. Mankind as a 
 whole is advancing both in Intelligence and the Spiritual appre- 
 hension of things, and we may reasonably infer that this upward 
 growth will continue until the whole race has attained an even 
 plane of development. Having considered in a general way the 
 past status of the race, both Personal and in Mass, as compared 
 with the present, we will now endeavor to point out the course of 
 its development from its original brute state.. 
 
 Section II. 
 
 Society as an Organism,. 
 
 Society has been likened to an organism, and the ingenuity of 
 modern writers has carried the comparison to almost fanciful 
 lengths. 
 
 Whilst there is a very radical difference between a society con- 
 sisting of rational human beings, and a society consisting of animal 
 cells, yet parallels may be drawn between the two which will lead 
 to a more thorough understanding of the social state. 
 
 Plato, in the " Republic," compares the functions of the state to 
 the faculties of the human mind, while Hobbes has drawn a still 
 more definite comparison between it and the human body. He 
 says : " That great Leviathian called a commonwealth, or state, 
 in Latin Civitas, which is but an artificial man, though of greater 
 stature and strength than the natural, for whose protection and de- 
 fense it was intended, and in which the Sovereignly is an artificial 
 /Soul, as giving life and motion to the whole body ; the magistrates 
 and other officers of judicature and execution artificial joints ; reward 
 and punishment, by which, fastened to the seat of the Sovereignty, 
 every joint and member is moved to perform his duty, are the 
 nerves, that do the same in the natural body ; the wealth and riches 
 of all the particular members are the strength ; Solus popidi, the 
 people's safety, the business ; counsellors, by whom all things need- 
 ful for it to know are suggested unto it, are the memory ; Equity 
 
Society as an Organism. 177 
 
 and Laws, an artificial reason and will; concord, health; sedition, 
 sickness ; civil war, death." 
 
 In the writings of more recent authors we find still more elabo- 
 rate correspondencies traced. Thus, the central government, being 
 the seat of the deliberative faculties of the state, corresponds to 
 the brain of the animal body ; the means made use of to convey 
 the mandates of the law-making power to the numerous executive 
 functionaries are the nerves, the functionaries themselves being 
 the muscles and limbs ; those aggregations of humanity, where raw 
 material is manufactured and collected for distribution, may be 
 compared with the glandular system : the highways of traffic, by 
 which the great centers distribute their manufactured material to 
 the social organism, are the vascular system. The military estab- 
 lishments correspond with the teeth and claws of the social animal, 
 and, in proportion to the ferocious character of the beast, are these 
 developed. The highest animal, Man, is but poorly provided by 
 nature with such weapons ; so, in the highest civilized society, the 
 United States, the military establishment is considered of but little 
 importance to the well-being of the state. 
 
 If we compare the lowest societies with the lowest animal organ- 
 isms, the correspondencies above noted will still hold. In such 
 animals there is no differentiation into distinct organs ; there is no 
 nervous system, no glandular, no vascular apparatus, but the whole 
 animal is apparently homogeneous throughout, both in structure 
 and function ; that is to say, the business of every cell of which it 
 is composed is the same as that of every other cell. Thus, in 
 amoeba, the distinction of parts is so obscure, and the functions of 
 every part so similar to the functions of every other, that the closest 
 examination fails to detect any difference. The structure of the 
 lowest savage communities may very well be likened to such an 
 animal organism. Among such, government is so obscure and un- 
 certain that it is hardly worthy of the name ; there is no division 
 of labor, every man performing the same duties as every other ; 
 there are no manufacturing centers ; and there is no regular system 
 of traffic necessitating the elaborate net-work of communication 
 which is so well developed in higher societies. By continuing to 
 trace out these correspondencies, we might find every division of 
 the animal kingdom paralleled, in a measure, by some social state 
 among men. As animal life, considered both in the individual 
 12 
 
178 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 and in the race, is the result of development, so is the social or- 
 ganism a consequence of gradual growth, both in its special as well 
 as general phases. 
 
 In the chapter on Philogenesis, we saw how the animal form in 
 the course of its development passed through the same states which 
 characterized its race development; so, in the social organism, we 
 find reproduced in the family life the 'primitive type of society. As 
 Phylogenesis is the study of the development of animal life as a 
 whole, so Sociogenesis is the study of the development of the so- 
 cial life of the race from its commencement. What Paleontology 
 is to Phylogeny, that history, including the study of language, is 
 to Sociogeny. The development of society, at least from a certain 
 point, has never been questioned, for we have only to turn over the 
 leaves of history ; but the data upon which the development of 
 life rests are not so easily furnished, and it has only been in recent 
 times that the historical records of the rocks have been open to 
 the inspection of men. 
 
 We have already seen that, both from a scientific and religious 
 stand-point, we are justified in believing that man has been created 
 by an evolving process from the lower creation, and not instan- 
 taneously called into existence from inorganic matter and endowed 
 with the highest faculties of the race. The successive steps which 
 primitive man took in his upward course are only hinted at in 
 Genesis, and to form any conception of the developmental process 
 which elevated him so high above his brute ancestors recourse 
 must be had to other sources of knowledge. The deductions of 
 science, the study of the higher brutes, and the lowest phases of 
 existing man, are the means we must make use of to trace the 
 course of the evolving process. 
 
 Man being in his physical make-up closely allied to the higher 
 order of existing apes, we are justified in asserting that his imme- 
 diate brute progenitor, long since extinct, must have borne a still 
 greater resemblance to these existing apes in general appearance, 
 habits, and geographical distribution.* Existing apes inhabit warm 
 
 * The theory of the celebrated Frenchman, M. Bailley, that man originated 
 around the North Pole, has lately been revived. He endeavored to show that 
 the early civilizers of Asia must have come from a northern region. If man 
 did originate around the North Pole, the climate at that point must have been 
 tropical in character. 
 
Society as an Organism. 179 
 
 climates, are vegetarian in their diet, have no fixed abode, and are 
 naked, except their natural covering of hair. We are justified in 
 believing that man's immediate progenitor resembled existing apes 
 in all these particulars, though probably the hairy covering was 
 less pronounced. As the brute developed into man, this hairy 
 coating became less and less. 
 
 That man must have been originally vegetarian in his diet is 
 shown by the formation of his digestive apparatus, which is obvi- 
 ously better adapted for fruits and tender roots, which are easily 
 digested without artificial preparation, than for the digestion of 
 uncooked flesh. The vegetarian habits of the early man are also 
 clearly indicated in the Biblical record. 
 
 "And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb-bearing 
 seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the 
 which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed ; to you it shall be for 
 meat." — Genesis 1 : 19. 
 
 A deficient supply of vegetable food would compel primitive 
 man at times to resort to a carnivorous diet Among savage tribes 
 inhabiting districts where the supply of fruit is abundant, flesh is 
 rarely eaten, but among those living in high latitudes, where na- 
 ture is not so lavish in her bounty, they are almost exclusively 
 fish and meat eaters. The discovery of fire, that inestimable boon 
 to the race, enabled him to prepare his food by heat, thus making 
 a flesh diet at once more palatable as well as more wholesome. 
 The higher orders of apes are not gregarious in their habits, and 
 from this we may infer that primitive man was not very sociable 
 with his fellows, and led rather a solitary life with the partner or 
 partners of his bosom. These unions probably lasted but a short 
 time, a new division taking place among the males at certain in- 
 tervals. The offspring would naturally fall to the lot of the mother, 
 under whose protection they would remain until able to look out 
 for themselves, when all maternal and filial attachment would dis- 
 appear. Even among some existing savages these feelings are so 
 poorly developed that the bond of union between the two is severed 
 as soon as the child attains a responsible age and can take care of 
 itself. With the growth of intelligence and language, the great 
 advantages arising from more enduring association would be more 
 and more appreciated ; and in the formation of a family life, more 
 or less permanent, we may recognize the first steps toward the or- 
 
180 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 ganization of society. The celebrated Condorcet, writing about a 
 century ago, says: "Une socie'te' de famille paralt naturelle a 
 l'homme. Formee d'abord par le besoin que les enfants ont de 
 leurs parents, par la tendresse des meres, par celle des peres, quoi- 
 que moins ge'ne'rale et moins vive, la longue dure'e de ce besoin a 
 donne le temps de naitre et de se developper a un sentiment qui a 
 du. inspirer le desir de perpe'tuer cette reunion. Cette me'me duree 
 a sum pour en faire sentir les avantages. Une famille placee sur 
 un sol qui offrait une subsistence facile, a pu ensuite se multiplier 
 et devenir une peuplade." 
 
 Thus, to those feelings of tenderness for offspring, which we see 
 manifested even by the brute creation, the origin of the family is 
 due. The advantages arising from such association would become 
 more and more conspicuous with advancing civilization. A union 
 of families would form the tribe, and from the bringing together 
 of tribes the nation would result. But consolidation into national 
 existence only takes place after a comparatively high degree of 
 civilization has been attained. 
 
 The family being the nucleus of social organization we would 
 naturally infer that the first form of government among men (if 
 we except the previous state of self-rule) was patriarchal in its 
 character. That such was the fact, the early history of nations 
 and numerous examples among existing savages furnish ample 
 proof. On the aggregation of families into tribes this form of 
 government would be modified and give place to chieftainship, 
 at first elective and then hereditary, and from the latter, by natural 
 course of development, would spring kingship. In the tribe the 
 election of a chief would naturally turn upon personal superiority 
 of some kind — mental, physical, or both. Among the brutes 
 physical strength dominates the herd, but as man emerged from 
 his original state another power — that derived from superior 
 mental endowments — began to make itself felt 
 
 Disease and death are alike the heritage and the terror of the 
 Civilized and the Uncivilized, and the Savage, who, by some for- 
 tunate accident, discovered that a certain herb, bark, or root was 
 efficacious in sickness, or relieved the agonies of pain, would at 
 once be raised to prominence. He would soon learn to know that 
 knowledge brings power, and would jealously guard the secrets 
 which gave him such superiority over his fellows. His more ig- 
 
Society as an Organism. 181 
 
 norant companions would soon begin to look upon him with su- 
 perstitious veneration as endowed with supernatural gifts. Natural 
 cunning would teach the Medicine Man to make the most of his 
 knowledge, and he would, in time, come to be regarded as the 
 head man in all affairs of importance affecting the tribe, whether 
 of a political or religious character. This natural inference is cor- 
 roborated by the facts of history, and by the conditions existing 
 among most' savage tribes of the present day. The position of the 
 Medicine Man as the chief of the tribe might be disputed, in times 
 of militancy, by the most renowned warrior, and the chief power 
 might thus be divided between them. Such was and is the gen- 
 eral condition of affairs among the North American Indians, and 
 many other savage tribes. 
 
 Among the early civilizations the establishment of a priestly 
 caste, the depositaries of all knowledge, and the political as well 
 as religious rulers of the nation, grew out of the preeminence of 
 the Medicine Man over other members of the tribe. His secrets 
 would be transmitted to a select few, or to the members of his own 
 family, and, in course of time, as tribes amalgamated into nations, 
 a body of men would arise in whose hands rested all knowledge 
 and power. Among the Hindoos and ancient Egyptians, the chief 
 priest was either king himself or ruler of the king. During a 
 period of extreme militancy or of conquest, the power of the 
 Priesthood might be weakened, but it would speedily recover its 
 ascendancy. 
 
 The civilizations of Japan and of Peru, at its discovery, furnish 
 good examples of the rule of a priestly caste in which the chief 
 of the priesthood sat upon the throne. In Japan the temporal 
 authority was usurped by the commander-in-chief of the forces, 
 and for some centuries two emperors, the spiritual and temporal, 
 ruled in Japan. But in recent years the Tycoon has been stripped 
 of his authority, and the Mikado, or Spiritual Emperor, re-instated 
 in full temporal power. 
 
 The history of Mediaeval Europe affords a remarkable instance 
 of reversion to priestly authority, during a period of universal 
 militancy. The Pope of Kome was the recognized sovereign of 
 all Christendom during several centuries, and the crowned heads 
 of Europe were little more than tributary princes. 
 
182 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Section III. 
 
 Development of Language, and the Social Functions. 
 
 Simultaneously "with the growth of the family relation, came 
 the development of language. From the inarticulate noises of the 
 brute to the rational and connected language of man is, indeed, a 
 tremendous stride, but we have good reason for believing that the 
 one was developed from the other by insensible gradations. Nor 
 is there anything in Genesis which is antagonistic to this interpre- 
 tation. We are not told that the first man, Adam, was directly 
 endowed with a fully equipped vocabulary of words by his 
 Maker ; " and out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast 
 of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them unto 
 Adam, to see what he would call them; and whatsoever Adam called 
 every living creature, that was the name thereof." — Genesis ii, 19. 
 
 It will be observed that the names themselves are not given to 
 Adam, but that he originates them himself. That the power to do 
 so was given him is, of course, implied. We are not to infer, then, 
 that man began with words, but with the power of forming words. 
 Remembering that, in its ultimate nature, Evolution can only be 
 defined as the continuous unfolding of the Will of the Great First 
 Cause, the difficulty of understanding how language might have 
 had a beginning through what we designate natural means, sec- 
 ondary laws, at once disappears. 
 
 Words are the symbols of things, and with the growth of the 
 knowledge of things must arise the symbols by which they are 
 represented. These symbols are certain coherent sounds produced 
 by the organs of speech at the suggestion of something within us 
 called ideas. Among the brutes coherent ideas cannot be said to 
 exist, hence with them there is no need of a coherent language- 
 But with the induction of a new power into the animal frame 
 called Soul, by virtue of which the atoms of the animal brain were 
 compelled to assume higher aggregations, improved language be- 
 came a necessity, and the organs of speech became modified ac- 
 cordingly. In the Brute the aims of existence seem to be the 
 maintenance of life and the propagation of the species, and for the 
 fulfiillment of these ends incoherent sounds, by means of which 
 they convey to their offspring or companions the discovery of food 
 or the presence of danger, answer the ends to be attained. 
 
Development of Language and the Social Functions. 183 
 
 The undeveloped condition of rational speech among the lowest 
 savages furnishes evidence of its possible evolution from brute be- 
 ginnings. Among many of them the poverty of language is such 
 that it cannot convey ideas of a highly abstract nature. Thus, 
 may tribes have no definite ideas of numbers above ten or twenty, 
 and their notion of these is derived from the number of fingers 
 and toes they possess. Numerous citations might be made from 
 the narratives of modern travelers, which go to show that there 
 are many savage tribes whose language is as rudimentary as we 
 can conceive it to be in a rational being. Thus, Galton, in his ac- 
 count of the Damaras, says : " They puzzle very much after five 
 in counting, because no spare hand remains to grasp and secure 
 the fingers that are required for units. Yet they seldom lose oxen ; 
 the way in which they discover the loss of one is not by the number 
 of the herd being diminished, but by the absence of a face they 
 know." Among the Brazilian Indians, Spix and Martins tell us 
 that they have no words for such abstract notions as plant, animal, 
 color, tone, sex, species, &c. 
 
 It is a significant fact that in the vocabulary of the savage there 
 is a notable absence of all words which indicate development of 
 the moral sentiments, whilst words expressive of violence and the 
 brute passions are comparatively numerous. Do we not observe 
 the same thing among the lowest orders of our own social state ? 
 
 Turning to the historical evidence of the evolution of language, 
 we find the testimony overwhelming. Nothing is more mutable 
 than language, and the changes constantly in progress are radical 
 and universal. There is not a language existing to-day that was 
 spoken a thousand years ago. In the modern French, Spanish, 
 and Italian we may trace the remains of their Roman and Gothic 
 ancestry, and the English language of to-day bears but a faint re- 
 semblance to the old Anglo-Saxon. And so it has been with all 
 language whatsoever; birth and death, growth and decay, are as 
 conspicuously evident in the history of languages as in the history 
 of nations. 
 
 Sanskrit, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, &c, to which modern civiliza- 
 tion owes so much, have long since perished, and their remains 
 offer to the Philologist the same interest that the fossil remains of 
 the rocky strata of the earth furnish the Paleontologist. From 
 
184 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 the one has been traced the origin of existing languages, and from 
 the other the origin of existing life. 
 
 Says the eminent Philologist, Max Muller: "As sure as the six 
 Roman dialects point to an original home of Italian shepherds on 
 the seven hills at Rome, the Aryan languages together point to an 
 earlier period of language, when the first ancestors of the Indians, 
 the Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Slaves, the Celts, and 
 the Germans were living together within the same inclosure, nay, 
 under the same roof." He holds that in the most elevated table 
 land of Central Asia there existed, in times far beyond the reach 
 of history and tradition, a country to which he gives the name 
 Aryana, and that from the language of this ancient nation have 
 sprung the languages of Europe and Hindoostan. . 
 
 Modern Philologers divide languages into three great Families : 
 The Aryan or Indo-Germanic, the Semitic, and the Turanian. 
 
 Under the Aryan are classed the languages of Europe and India, 
 and hence also called the Indo-European. Under the Semitic are 
 embraced the Aramaic, Hebraic, and Arabic. Under the Turanian 
 are included the Tungusic, Mongolic, Tunc, Finnic, and Samoy- 
 edic in the North, and the Tamulic, Bhotiya, Taic, in the South. All 
 language bears internal evidence of having had a common origin. 
 Thus the researches of the philologer furnish arguments in favor 
 of the unity of the human family, thereby corroborating the state- 
 ments of Holy Writ and strengthening the theory of Evolution. 
 
 With this brief outline of the evolution of language, we will 
 now turn to an equally brief survey of the development of the 
 social functions. 
 
 The lowest savage communities present us with a state of tilings 
 where the complexity of the social functions is such that, as yet, 
 there is no division of labor, the duties of every man of the tribe 
 being the same as every other. Thus, they are all warriors, all 
 huntsmen, and all are equally skillful in the manufacture of clothing 
 and implements of warfare and in the building of houses and 
 canoes. Every part of the social organism is equally adapted for 
 the performance of its various functions. As civilization advances, 
 skilled labor arises, and different individuals are selected to perform 
 different occupations. Thus, one man may have proved himself 
 the most skillful house-builder, another a canoe-builder, another a 
 weapon-maker, and so on through the various occupations. 
 
Development of Language and the Social Functions. 185 
 
 As greater progress is made, new vocations are developed, and 
 more specialists arise. This differentiation of society grows with 
 its growth, and becomes more and more conspicuous as civilization 
 advances. Compare a village community of the United States 
 with a village community of South Africa, and what a contrast is 
 offered us! In the civilized community we will find at least one, 
 and most likely several, representatives of the various occupations 
 which distinguish the highest civilization : A priest, physician, 
 lawyer, banker, druggist, dry-goods merchant, grocer, shoemaker, 
 blacksmith, carpenter, mason, miller, photographer, tailor, house- 
 builder, carriage-maker. Besides these diverse occuputions there 
 will be numerous others less conspicuous, but all serving some 
 useful end to the society as a whole. 
 
 In the savage community will be found a Medicine Man, who 
 will probably unite in himself the offices of priest, physician, and 
 chief of the tribe ; we may also find some few who are rather 
 more skillful than their fellows in the making of canoes and wea- 
 pons, and some who are more noted as warriors or huntsmen. The 
 tremendous impetus which the arts and sciences have given to in- 
 dividual pursuits has brought about a specialization of function 
 in modern society of which our ancestors, two hundred years ago, 
 could not have so much as dreamed. This specialization or divi- 
 sion of labor is nowhere better illustrated than in the history of 
 the healing art. In early times the medical man, who was also a 
 priest, was the sole depositary of all the sciences ; and this is 
 proved by the fact that the word Phusikos came to be used at an 
 early date among the Greeks to designate those who professed to 
 heal the sick. This word, from which our own word Physician is 
 derived, signifies a student of nature, (from Phusis, nature,) and has 
 no reference to the possession of healing power. Among the early 
 Greeks, therefore, the student of nature and the medical man were 
 always united in the same person. We have already seen that 
 among existing savages this is universally the case. He who be- 
 came a physician or student of nature had in view, as the principal 
 object of such study, the power of curing disease and relieving 
 suffering. In an early state of society the knowledge that cannot 
 be made to subserve some useful purpose is not esteemed ; hence 
 the early students of nature chiefly prized that knowledge which 
 could ameliorate the physical condition of their fellows, and he 
 
186 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 whose stores of information enabled him to cure sickness and re- 
 lieve pain, justly looked upon himself as having attained the most 
 exalted object in life. 
 
 With the advance of civilization, feelings of sestheticism gradu- 
 ally develop, and knowledge in time begins to be prized purely 
 for its own sake, independent of the practical uses to which it can 
 be put. There would now gradually arise a few individuals whose 
 time was not entirely devoted to the practical ends of healing the 
 sick, and the number of such would increase with the growth of 
 society ; and this would continue until there arose a class who cul- 
 tivated the sciences, distinct from the professors of the healing art. 
 But this distinct class has always been extremely small until com- 
 paratively recent times ; and, even now, the vast majority of the 
 purely scientific men are drawn directly from the ranks of the 
 medical profession. 
 
 But, besides these who have received a medical education, there 
 are numerous others, in no way identified with the profession, who 
 cultivate every branch of natural science. Two hundred years 
 ago an intimate acquaintance with Physics, Chemistry, Botany, and 
 Zoology was of comparatively rare occurrence beyond the ranks 
 of the medical profession. Now every one of these branches are 
 cultivated individually by men who have no knowledge of the 
 other branches of medicine. This specialization of the maternal 
 trunk has been carried still further, and every organ or system of 
 organs in the human body is represented by specialists who almost 
 ignore the study of diseases that may afflict the rest of the body. 
 Thus, we have specialists of the nervous system, heart, lungs, liver, 
 urinary organs, eye, ear, throat, skin, &c. 
 
 The application of science to the arts has caused a differentiation 
 in industrial pursuits of all kinds which is even appreciable from 
 year to year. This specialization of function is characteristic of 
 the highest mass civilization. Through its means the wealth of 
 the ages has been accumulated, to which new wealth is being added 
 day by day. Civilization is unfolding more and more the capa- 
 bilities of the race as a whole, and who will be so bold as to mark 
 the limits of its growth? Evolution has simplified the complex 
 constitution of embryo humanity, and this simplification will con- 
 tinue as the race advances in civilization. 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 187 
 
 Section IV. 
 
 Development of Governmental Institutions. 
 
 General reference has already been made to the growth of gov- 
 ernment, and we saw that the nucleus of the social organism was 
 the family from which the tribe arose, and that a union of these 
 constituted the nation. It was also shown that when the family 
 relation was well established, patriarchal government is the form 
 we would naturally expect to find, and that it would subsist until 
 aggregation of families into tribes began to take place, when the 
 patriarchal would give way to chieftainship, at first elective and 
 then hereditary ; consolidation of tribes into nations would be fol- 
 lowed by a regal or imperial rule. The patriarchal form of govern- 
 ment is well illustrated by some of the early civilizations of the 
 Biblical record. Among existing savages traces may be found in 
 the headless tribes, where there is no regular chief, the head of 
 each family occupying an independent position of every other. In 
 tribal government the power of the chief, whether elective or he- 
 reditary, would be limited or directed by a council consisting of 
 the old men. In this assembly would be discussed all important 
 affairs concerning the common weal. The execution of the plans 
 so determined upon would be entrusted to the chief, assisted, it 
 may be, by several subordinates. 
 
 This is the form of government among most savages at the pre- 
 sent time. The power which the chief exercised would depend 
 largely upon his individuality, and his personal influence might 
 be such that, at times, he would exercise almost absolute authority. 
 But such personal ascendancy would be of short duration among 
 savages, being everywhere checked by that restlessness under re- 
 straint which is common to the lowest as well as to the highest de- 
 veloped intelligence. 
 
 We therefore find Limited government to be as much the char- 
 acteristic of the savage as of the more highly civilized nations. 
 The intermediate form of Despotism is only possible after consid- 
 erable advance has been made beyond the savage state, and after 
 class distinctions have arisen ; and this presupposes previous ag- 
 gregation of tribes by conquest, and the reduction of the conquered 
 to the condition of slaves. 
 
 War has been the furnace which has supplied the plastic mate- 
 
188 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 rials from which the nations have been molded ; and this, to a 
 limited degree, still continues to be the case. But brute force is 
 everywhere giving way before the superior might of intellect, and 
 reason now accomplishes what the sword did in more barbarous 
 ages. 
 
 It has already been shown that, originally, man must have been 
 exclusively vegetarian in his diet, and that he only acquired his 
 taste for flesh after considerable progress had been made. 
 
 Increase of population would rapidly encroach upon the supply 
 of vegetable food, and this would necessitate migrations to other 
 fields. But, in course of time, these, too, would be exhausted, and 
 new regions would have to be sought. The pressure of popula- 
 tion upon the means of subsistence would at last reach a point 
 when other kinds of food, other than vegetables, would have to 
 be resorted to in order to stave off hunger; and man gradually 
 came to be a flesh-eater. 
 
 As this habit became confirmed, the Hunting Stage of Man's 
 existence was inaugurated; and his nomadic tendencies, which 
 were previously limited to those territories which furnished a nat- 
 ural supply of vegetable food, now reached greater development. 
 It was doubtless during this Hunting stage that the great geo- 
 graphical distribution of the race took place. As he receded 
 further and further from the warm cradle of his infancy, led on 
 by the pursuit of game, the necessity of clothing to protect his 
 naked body from the cold blasts of a less genial clime would 
 force itself more and more upon him, and he would thus learn to 
 throw over his bare shoulders the skins of the wild beasts he had 
 slain for food. It is highly probable, therefore, that primitive man 
 first began to wear clothing after he had migrated from the country 
 of his birth. The necessity of some kind of shelter would also 
 force itself upon his dawning intelligence. Natural caverns would 
 first supply this want, and the remains of the cave dwellers of 
 Europe bear witness of this period of his life. From these natural 
 shelters to a rude hut of mud, stone, or timber, covered with skins, 
 would be but a short step. 
 
 The discovery of fire and the manufacturing of weapons to as- 
 sist in taking game were immense strides. The earliest civiliza- 
 tion which prehistoric researches have brought to light shows 
 that man was already possessed of fire and flint weapons, and a 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 189 
 
 rude kind of potter}\ Of all the discoveries made by man, after 
 the development of language, that of Fire must be given the first 
 place, for without it all further advance would have been impossi- 
 ble, and he would never have emerged from his primitive state. 
 
 How this great discovery was made is, of course, but a matter 
 for conjecture. The most popular theory is that it was first ob- 
 tained by friction between two sticks ; but, when we consider the 
 difficulty attending this process, the theory is a doubtful one. 
 Natural fires induced by lightning or the presence of a volcano 
 seems to be a more plausible explanation. Its principle quality, 
 that of giving warmth, would soon become familiar to the savage 
 mind, and engender the desire to reproduce it on special occasions 
 when exposed to intense cold. In making his flint tools, the sparks 
 emitted might suggest the possibility that they were kindred in 
 nature to the natural fire he had witnessed, and this recognition 
 would be followed by an attempt to ignite inflammable material 
 by the spark. The production of fire by friction, so universal 
 among savages, was probably discovered at a later date. The pre- 
 paration of flesh by heat was another great step, and this, too, was 
 doubtless an accidental discovery, somewhat after the manner of 
 Charles Lamb's "roast pig." 
 
 Familiarity with the animal world, which his hunting life oc- 
 casioned, and the difficulty of always supplying himself with suf- 
 ficient food, would teach . him the wisdom of endeavoring to 
 domesticate the tamer animals for purposes of food in times of 
 dearth. When this custom was firmly established, the Pastoral 
 stage of development was inaugurated. The possession of flocks 
 and herds tended to lessen their nomadic habits, for, being assured 
 of food, the necessity for being constantly on the go in pursuit of 
 roving game would no longer arise. 
 
 Their migrations would now be guided by the supply of food 
 for the herds, and this would naturally lead them to those fertile 
 regions were rich pastures prevail. Once established in such a 
 favorable spot, where the bounty of nature supplied every want, 
 they could not but contrast its great advantages over the compara- 
 tively barren regions from which they came. Their migrations 
 would, therefore, in all probability come to an end, and what was 
 intended, originally, as a temporary abode, would become a fixed 
 home. 
 
190 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 In course of time the tent of skins, a necessity of their former 
 mode of life, would be supplanted by more permanent and com- 
 modious shelters of sun-dried brick, stone, or timber. A fixed 
 home in a fertile country would encourage experiments in plant- 
 ing, and a rude tillage of the soil would gradually arise in connec- 
 tion with herd-keeping. And now the Agricultural stage of 
 development was entered upon, and progress became rapid. That 
 native ferocit}^ of character inherited from brutish ancestors, and 
 which had been mitigated, in some degree, by the pastoral life, 
 was now further softened, thereby fitting man more and more for 
 domestic intercourse, and the exercise of . the peaceful arts. The 
 germs of true civilization now began to develop. The testimony 
 furnished by history as to the seat of the first great civilizations 
 confirms the deductions above reached. The fertile basins of the 
 Nile and the Euphrates, and the broad plains of India and China, 
 offered rich pastures for the nomadic tribes of central Asia, and 
 became so many nurseries. From these points as centers, the 
 germs of civilization have been disseminated over the world. 
 
 But this dissemination was not effected so much by the quiet 
 intercourse of peace as by the storms of war; and a brief sketch 
 will enable us to form some notion how these small agricultural 
 communities, and nurseries of civilization, developed into the 
 mighty empires which the dawn of history offers for our contem- 
 plation. 
 
 The civilizations of the Egyptians, Chaldeans, Hindoos, and 
 Chinese break upon us suddenly from out the past, presenting us 
 with arts, sciences, a numerous priesthood, elaborate religious cere- 
 monies, a highly developed centralized government, established 
 castes among the people, and stupendous public works. Authentic 
 history commences with all these evidences of a high state of 
 civilization, but how the several nations referred to attained to this 
 wonderful development, history is silent. The Biblical records, 
 the oldest writings which have come down to us, merely make 
 bare statements, without attempting to trace the path of progress. 
 That these civilizations shot up fully grown, we are not warranted 
 in believing, nor are the writings of Scripture to be so interpreted. 
 
 In attempting to pierce the veil which conceals the events of pre- 
 historic times from those of authentic history, we must call to our 
 assistance the events which this authentic history supplies, and 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 191 
 
 these, in connection with the deductions of reason, may enable us 
 to give a rational explanation of the rise of those great empires 
 which stand out so conspicuously above the horizon of the past 
 
 The task before us, then, is to give a rational answer to each of 
 the following questions : 
 
 Were the great civilizations above referred to the result of a 
 gradual development of the original inhabitants of these favored 
 regions undisturbed by conquest? Was the absolute despotism 
 which characterized their government, one and all, merely the 
 consequence of gradual usurpation of power by the patriarchal 
 chief, who originally ruled with the assistance of a council of elders? 
 How arose that division into castes which universally distinguished 
 them? Industrial pursuits, of which tillage of the soil is literally 
 the ground-work and the chief, can only flourish in a peaceful 
 community, and their exercise tends to tone down the war-like 
 spirit, supplanting the ferocity which carnage engenders by the 
 love of ease and tranquility. Progress in the arts of peace would 
 thus be gained, but it would be at the sacrifice of the desire and 
 ability to carry on war. It is the characteristic of a low civiliza- 
 tion that the people are either very gentle and peace-loving or very 
 ferocious and fond of war ; and the arts of peace and the arts of 
 war in such a community can never be developed at one and the 
 same time — one is always sacrificed to the other. Hence these 
 early agricultural settlements would in time lose both the spirit 
 and capacity to carry on war, all their energies being devoted to 
 developing those arts which tended to ameliorate their physical 
 condition. A half-savage community so circumstanced would fall 
 an easy prej 7 to any nomadic and war like tribe that might attack 
 it. Subjugation would be complete, and the conquerors, taking- 
 possession of the territory, would reduce the conquered to the 
 condition of slaves. The arts which the original people had dis- 
 covered would be quickly adopted by the conquerors, and possibly 
 the customs and manners of the conquered might in a measure be- 
 come engrafted on their own. The elements of social distinctions 
 would now be furnished; the conquerors would supply the ruling 
 class, while the conquered would furnish the lower or laboring 
 class. 
 
 The priest class of the conquered community, being the depos- 
 itaries of all knowledge, would soon gain an ascendancy over their 
 
192 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 more ignorant and superstitious conquerors, and from being num- 
 bered among the ruled it would not be long ere they recovered 
 their pristine authority with, it may be, increased power. A long 
 continued peace would in time convert the conquerors into an 
 effeminate race, but the peaceful arts would be brought to still 
 higher perfection during the period of tranquility. The appear- 
 ance of another marauding band of war-like shepherds would again 
 result in the subjugation of the country and the entire or partial 
 enslavement of its inhabitants. But the priesthood, at first de- 
 based, would soon recover their ascendancy with new accessions 
 of power. 
 
 The new blood and energy brought in by every new conquest, 
 and the subsequent period of peace, would carry civilization higher 
 and higher, and eventually culminate in the establishment of na- 
 tional organizations similar to those that greet us at the dawn of 
 history in the valleys of the Nile and Euphrates and on the plains 
 of India and China, and, in recent times, which existed in Peru 
 and Mexico, and still exists, measurably, in Japan. The distinc- 
 tion of castes, already referred to as being one of the chief charac- 
 teristics of all the very early civilizations, finds a most plausible 
 explanation on the hypothesis of repeated conquests and the per- 
 manent occupancy of the country by the conquerors. 
 
 In early Egypt, Persia, and India four distinct castes were to be 
 met with. The first and highest was the Priesthood ; second, the 
 Military class ; third, the Husbandmen and Merchants ; fourth, the 
 Sudra or Serfs. In India there existed a class even below the 
 Sudra or Serf caste, called Pariahs, who were the very dregs of 
 the population and universally contemned and trodden upon. 
 According to Hindoo tradition, the Brahmin or Priest caste sprang 
 originally from the head of Brahma, and to them were assigned 
 the duties of teaching and sacrificing and all the offices of religion. 
 They were regarded with the most sacred veneration and looked 
 upon as the most exalted of men, foreign kings being infinitely 
 beneath the meanest Brahmin. The least disrespect shown to one 
 of the sacred order was punishable as an atrocious crime. 
 
 The military class sprang from the arm of Brahma and the agri- 
 cultural and mercantile from his thigh. The Sudra proceeded 
 from his foot, and their chief duty consisted in serving the other 
 three clases. They were not permitted to read the sacred books, 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 193 
 
 nor were they instructed in any of the rites of religion. The Sudra 
 was not allowed to amass wealth, and all his goods, as well as 
 himself, were the property of his master. He was on no account 
 permitted to better his condition nor aspire above the caste in 
 in which he was born. But his state, with all its disadvantages, 
 was still infinitely above that of the Pariah, who was regarded as 
 the outcast of society and treated with less consideration than the 
 brutes of the field. 
 
 Such a condition of things could never have arisen except 
 through successive conquests, and this inference as to the events 
 of pre-historic times is strengthened by the occurrences which have 
 taken place since history began to unroll her pages for our inspec- 
 tion. Those pages are little more than chronicles of violence and 
 bloodshed; a never-ending cycle of conquest and enslavement, 
 where the conquerors of to-day became the conquered of to-morrow. 
 
 A characteristic feature of these early conquests, and one which 
 is so conspicuous that it cannot fail to attract the notice of the his- 
 torical student, is that, generally, the conquered nation is more 
 highly civilized than their conquerors. The arts and sciences, 
 manners and customs of the conquered, though partially eclipsed 
 for the time by the storms of war, soon revive and are adopted by 
 the rude conquerors, who are thereby softened and elevated. 
 
 This course of events, which was almost universal in early times 
 when the process of nation-making was in its infancy, was reversed 
 when civilization attained to a higher degree of development ; for 
 the arts and sciences, which had previously been exclusively en- 
 gaged in lifting man from a savage condition, were now used to 
 perfect the art of war, and a nation would thus come to excel both 
 in the arts of peace and the practice of war. Such a nation, there- 
 fore, reversing the obligation, would carry its higher civilization to 
 the conquered. 
 
 The obligations incurred by the conquerors of the early period 
 of the world have been and are being paid back by the conquerors 
 of modern times. The savage of to-day, pitted against a civilized 
 nation, must either become elevated or undergo extermination. 
 But the dawn of history furnishes us with quite different pictures. 
 We behold Egypt, the mother of civilization, overrun by a horde 
 of rude shepherds from the wilds of Ethiopia and Abyssinia and 
 her lands partitioned among them. How often the same thing had 
 13 
 
194 Involution versus Involution. 
 
 occurred previous to this first record of history we can only con- 
 jecture. The civilization of the Tigro-Euphrates basin, which 
 probably took its rise nearly about the same time with that of the 
 Nile valley, was subjected to the same inroads of more barbarous 
 and war-like neighbors. The conquest of this region by Nimrod 
 (2200 B. C, about) is the first which history records. 
 
 According to the Bible, this Nimrod was a "mighty hunter," 
 and founded many cities. There is no doubt that he belonged to 
 that nomadic people of half hunters and half shepherds that must 
 have, at this time, completely overrun the high central parts of 
 Asia. The infant agricultural civilization which had arisen in the 
 rich valley of the Euphrates would fall an easy conquest to such 
 a war-like band of shepherds. In all probability the country had 
 been overrun many times before Nimrod established his Empire.* 
 The Biblical record informs us that the successors of Nimrod were 
 overthrown by the Elamites under Chedorlaomer. From the es- 
 tablishment of the Elamitic dynasty to the next conquest is a 
 blank of about 700 years, during which many different conquests 
 doubtless occurred. About this time the country was again over- 
 run, and the reigning dynasty was replaced by another herd of 
 shepherds from the Arabian plains, and after about 245 years these 
 gave place to another horde of Assyrians. 
 
 That the early agricultural settlements of China were subjected 
 to the same inroads of wandering shepherds from the high table- 
 land of Asia is sufficiently shown by the existence of the great 
 wall, which was begun about 300 B. C. How often the country 
 had been overrun prior to this date the Chinese chronicles give no 
 account ; but the notion of undertaking such a stupendous work, 
 which has no equal in ancient or modern times, would not have 
 presented itself to the minds of the people had not its necessity 
 been demonstrated by the previous history of the country. In- 
 deed, China may be regarded as the vast receptacle which has re- 
 ceived and civilized the barbarous hordes of Tartary from time 
 immemorial. As soon as population pressed upon the means of 
 subsistence, which would occur at intervals, through the wearing 
 
 * According to profane history, Babylon was founded by Belus, who is sup- 
 posed to be the same with Nimrod, 2100 B. C. His son Ninus succeeded him, 
 and either founded or enlarged Ninevah. Semiramis, his queen, added much 
 to the splendor of the two cities. 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 195 
 
 out of pasture lands, these hordes would swoop down upon the 
 fertile plains of China, and would, in time, become amalgamated 
 with the conquered race. As late as the thirteenth century, we 
 behold a nomadic Tartar chief, Gengis Khan, uniting the wander- 
 ing shepherd tribes of central Asia, and carrying his arms to the 
 heart of China. The conquest which he initiated was completed 
 by Kublai, and the Tartar dynasty so founded gave nine succes- 
 sive Emperors to China. In the year 1357, a revolution occurred 
 which overthrew the Tartars, and seated the former dynasty on 
 the throne. This subsisted for 276 years, and was again over- 
 thrown (1641) by a horde of Mantchoo Tartars, and this dynasty 
 still retain the throne. 
 
 All the conquests above referred to were universally made by a 
 barbarous and rude people over one of a much higher civilization. 
 As further illustrations of this truth may be cited the conquest 
 of the Grecian States by their comparatively rude neighbors, the 
 Macedonians. Barbarous and war-like Rome now gradually arose 
 on the horizon, and soon enveloped the higher Grecian civilization 
 in its dark folds. The philosophy, literature, and art of the con- 
 quered brought with them the inevitable decline of the war-like 
 spirit, and Rome, the mistress of the world, soon became a prey to 
 the barbarous hordes she had so often conquered. Rome, during 
 the height of her military prosperity, both received an$ gave a 
 higher civilization — from Greece she received ; upon Gaul, Ger- 
 many, and Briton, she conferred. 
 
 To the repeated inroads of the northern nations she fiually suc- 
 cumbed; and the civilization which they received, in turn made 
 them an easy prey to the successive hordes which swept over Eu- 
 rope from the plains of Asia. 
 
 Among the first early conquests recorded by history, in which 
 the conquerors were the more highly civilized race, are the Phcene- 
 cian settlements in Greece and other points on the Mediterranean. 
 The first Phcenecian colony, under Cecrops, is said to have landed 
 on the shores of Greece about the year 1500 B. C. The original 
 inhabitants were, in time, reduced to slavery. As the human race 
 advanced, the instances where the conquerors carried to the con- 
 quered a higher state of civilization than they found became more 
 and more frequent. Thus the career of nearly all people shows us 
 that the obligations they incurred, in their earlier history, to a 
 
196 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 more civilized nation, are paid back, at a later period, to a less 
 highly civilized one. 
 
 Sufficient evidence has been adduced to show beyond all doubt 
 that in the very early civilizations, and the earlier the truer it be- 
 comes, the conquered races have generally been the civilizers; and 
 this truth, which we were led to infer, has received positive proof 
 from the records of history. But in modern times the obligation 
 is all one way ; a savage nation can no longer cope with a civilized 
 one, and the conquerors always take with them a higher state of 
 things than they found. 
 
 Why is it that at one period of the world's history its highest 
 civilization is less able to defend itself against more barbarous 
 neighbors than at a much later period ? It might, at first, be in- 
 ferred that no matter what might be the absolute height of a civil- 
 ization, it would insure its possessors against the attacks of those 
 who possessed an inferior one. The explanation of this apparent 
 paradox has already been touched upon. In the early stages of 
 human development the first use to which knowledge is put is to 
 ameliorate the physical condition. Thus, the war-like ferocity 
 which is common to man in his hunting and shepherd state be- 
 comes mitigated as soon as Jie enters upon an agricultural life. 
 His knowledge is as yet too rudimentary to enable him to make 
 much improvement on the weapons of his earlier state, and without 
 improved weapons his physical ability to carry on war is no greater 
 than his more barbarous neighbors, while, at the same time, he has 
 lost the ferocious spirit which they still retain ; thus he is no longer 
 their equal in the field. But, as civilization advances, the sciences 
 which are discovered lend their aid in developing the art of war, 
 and new and more powerful instruments of destruction are in- 
 vented which enable a less war-like nation to contend successfully 
 against a more ferocious and less civilized antagonist. The appli- 
 cation of the science of chemistry and the mechanical arts has so 
 improved the methods of killing that the human race would soon 
 be exterminated from off the face of the earth were the war-like 
 spirit comparable to what it was in former ages of the world. Had 
 the breech-loading rifle and the Gatling gun been known in the 
 middle ages, Europe would have soon been converted into a howl- 
 ing wilderness, such was the ferocity of that barbarous period. 
 
 An old chronicler, describing the state of France about the be- 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 197 
 
 ginning of the fifteenth century, says: "In sooth, the estate of 
 France was then most miserable. There appeared nothing but a 
 horrible face, confusion, poverty, desolation, solitarinesse, and feare. 
 The lean and bare laborers in the country did terrifie even theeves 
 themselves, who had nothing left them to spoile but the carkasses 
 of these poore miserable creatures, wandering up and down like 
 ghostes drawne out of their graves. * * * * All men-of- 
 war were well agreed to spoile the countryman and merchant. 
 Even the cattell, accustomed to the larame bell, the signe of the 
 enemy's approach, would run home of themselves without any 
 guide by this accustomed misery." 
 
 The numerous castellated structures perched on commanding 
 heights, the remains of which are still to be seen throughout 
 Europe, adding an air of romance to the landscape, were the abode 
 of professional cut-throats, whose pastime was murder and rapine. 
 Such was the lawless state of the times that industrial communi- 
 ties were compelled to band together for mutual protection ; and 
 the celebrated league of the Hans towns, which did so much for 
 the civilization of Europe, was the result. 
 
 In tracing the decline of the war-like spirit among men we may 
 recognize four chief causes : 
 
 1. The softening and elevating influence of the Christian re- 
 ligion. 
 
 2. The invention of gun-powder, and its application to the art 
 of war. 
 
 3. The invention of printing, and the consequent diffusion of 
 knowledge. 
 
 4. The application of steam to locomotion, which brought about 
 freer intercourse among the nations, removing ancient prejudices, 
 and binding men together by the ties of self-interest. 
 
 Before the invention of fire-arms, every man was a soldier, and 
 subject to be called upon at any time to dip his hand in the blood 
 of his fellows. Development of the methods of war necessitated 
 more training on the part of the soldier, and standing armies grad- 
 ually arose. The mass of the people thus became separate from 
 the military class, and could devote more of their time to peaceful 
 pursuits. The diffusion of knowledge, brought about by the 
 printing press, increased the number of the intellectual classes ; 
 whilst the advantages of commercial intercourse, encouraged by 
 
198 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 the improved methods of locomotion, became more and more ap 
 parent. All these causes together rapidly increased the number 
 of those who were interested in maintaining peace. 
 
 War is the chief occupation of the semi-civilized ; hence, all 
 early government tends to assume the centralized or militant tvpe. 
 Among the savages, where there is no established polity, and in 
 whom there is an innate love of freedom and impatience under 
 control, this centralization of power rarely, if ever, takes place, 
 and if it should arise on special occasions, it is always of short 
 duration. But among the semi-civilized centralization of power 
 has always been the rule. The militant type of government, as 
 Mr. Spencer well says, " is one in which the army is the nation 
 mobilized, while the nation is the quiescent army, and which, 
 therefore, acquires a structure common to army and nation." 
 
 " Centralized control is the primary trait acquired by every body 
 of fighting men, be it horde of savages, group of brigands, or mass 
 of soldiers. And this centralized control, necessitated during war, 
 characterizes the government during peace. Among the uncivilized 
 there is a marked tendency for the military chief to -become also 
 the political bead, (the Medicine Man being his only competitor ;) 
 and in a conquering race of savages this political headship becomes 
 fixed. Among semi-civilized the conquering commander and the 
 despotic king are the same ; and they remain the same among the 
 civilized down to late times." Thus the comparatively free and 
 limited government of the savage gives place to the centralization 
 and despotism of the semi-civilized. 
 
 The great empires of early times, Eg} 7 ptian, Babalonian, As- 
 syrian, and, later on, the Macedonian and Roman, were all of this 
 type. At the present day the same system of things exists among 
 some of the principal nations, with this difference, however, that 
 in very early times the Despot was chief of the Priesthood, and 
 frequently exercised religious offices. Plato, referring to the dig- 
 nity and importance attached to the sacerdotal office, saj^s :* "For 
 the figure of priests and prophets is replete with prudence, and ob- 
 tains a reputation for respect through the greatness of the matters 
 in their hands ; so that in Egypt it is not permitted for a king to 
 govern without the sacerdotal science ; and should any one pre- 
 viously of another genus of men become by violence king, he is after- 
 
 *Tlie guest in "The Statesman," translated by Surges. 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 199 
 
 wards compelled to be initiated in the mysteries of this genus. Further 
 still, among the Greeks, one may find in many places that the 
 greatest sacrifices relating to matters of this kind are imposed upon 
 the greatest offices ; and what I assert is shown particularly among 
 you. For to him who is chosen by lot the king here, they say 
 that of all the ancient sacrifices those held in the highest venera- 
 tion and most peculiar to the country are assigned."* 
 
 It is true that the present Emperor of Eussia is the head of the 
 church, but he in no sense considers himself a priest nor does he 
 exercise religious offices. The dukes of Muscovey originally held 
 their temporal authority at the hands of the Patriarch. But the 
 temporal ruler gradually usurped independent power and finally 
 assumed the nominal headship of the church itself. The bloody 
 Henry VIII, in throwing off his allegiance to the Pope of Bome> 
 established the English church, arrogating to himself its headship; 
 and the constitution of the free government of England still re- 
 mains encumbered with the humiliating declaration that the sov- 
 ereign is the head of the church. How this relic of barbarism has 
 been allowed to remain so long on the statute-books of a nation 
 where there is so much enlightened thought, is one of the many 
 extraordinary anomalies which the English constitution presents. 
 
 Democratic independence characterizes human institutions in 
 the first as well as in the latest and highest stages of their develop- 
 ment. At both ends of the chain of human progress we behold ab- 
 solute freedom, and all the forms which government has assumed 
 between these extremes of civilization represent the steps taken in 
 its upward course of development. But the freedom of the prim- 
 itive man differs from the freedom of the civilized man in this very 
 important feature : the freedom of the one is the freedom of the 
 brute and springs from ignorance ; the freedom of the other is the 
 assertion of the dignity of the individual, and springs from the 
 highest enlightenment. The primitive man has no community of 
 action with his fellows, and with him there is no government ; 
 whereas, in the civilized man, community of action is insured by 
 an established constitution, and government is brought to its 
 highest state of perfection. 
 
 The following table will convey a general idea of the progressive 
 
 * The second archon at Athens was called the king, and had cognizance over 
 the principal religious festivals. 
 
200 
 
 Evolution ve?sus Involution. 
 
 I. Self Rule. 
 
 (Solitary life; fam- 
 ily life not yet 
 well establish- 
 ed.) 
 
 II. Absolute 
 
 Rule. 
 (Family life.) 
 
 steps which the race has taken in its onward course of develop- 
 ment up to the present time, commencing with the lowest conceiv- 
 able state of Primitive Man : 
 
 Family relations not yet well established. 
 No recognition of Paternal authority. Ma- 
 ternal authority in force until the offspring- 
 is able to care for itself, after which all rela- 
 tion ceases. Of this condition of the race no 
 examples remain. This very primitive man 
 is extinct. 
 
 Paternal government; in which the Father 
 exercises absolute authority over his chil- 
 dren, which continues, in the lowest man, 
 until the children establish families of their 
 own. In its higher developed state the au- 
 <! thority of the Father remains in force as long 
 as he lives. The patriarchal rulers of the 
 Bible are of this type. Some African and 
 Australian savages, and some Esquimaux, 
 furnish illustrations of the first phase of this 
 form of government. 
 
 Elective or hereditary chieftainship, aided 
 by a council of elders. No written consti- 
 tution nor fixed laws. Governmental action 
 entirely guided by the needs of the passing 
 moment, and determined upon in general 
 council, presided over by the chief. The 
 authorit}^ of the chief will depend upon his 
 individuality. If he be Medicine Man it 
 will probably be absolute, though of uncer- 
 tain tenure. 
 
 Examples — Savage tribes generally in all 
 ages and places. The patriarchal chieftain- 
 ships of the hunting and shepherd states of 
 early and existing times. 
 
 Some phases of the early Greek states and 
 early Rome. The Gauls, Germans, Saxon 
 heptarchies and Caledonian clans, &c, &c. 
 
 III. Limited 
 
 Rule. 
 (Tribal life.) 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 
 
 201 
 
 IV. Absolute 
 Rule. 
 
 (National life.) 
 
 Y. Limited 
 Rule. 
 
 (National life.) 
 
 National existence. Numerous tribes ag- 
 gregated together into a coherent mass, form- 
 ing a nation, ruled by a Despot, (priestly or 
 militant,) whose Individual Will is the Su- 
 ■{ preme Law. 
 
 Examples — The Early Empires of Egypt, 
 Babylonia, Assyria, Persia, Macedonia, Rome. 
 
 Among existing nations, Russia, China, 
 Japan, Turkey, &c. 
 
 National existence. Highly evolved sys- 
 tem of Government, and a written constitu- 
 tion. Will of the Ruler (entitled Emperor, 
 King, or President) guided or modified by a 
 representative council of the nation. 
 
 Examples — Some phases of Rome and 
 Grecian states. Oligarchies or Republics of 
 Italy in middle ages. 
 
 Among existing nations, Germany, Aus- 
 tria, Italy, Spain, England, and the central- 
 ized republic of France. 
 
 England, though a monarchy, has passed 
 beyond the militant type of government, 
 whilst France, though a Republic, is still es- 
 sentially militant in type. 
 
 National existence. Highly Evolved sys- 
 tem of government, and elaborate written 
 constitution. The Chief Magistrate, (entitled 
 President,) a recognized Servant of the peo- 
 ple, executing their will in Congress assem- 
 bled. No privileged classes, and the right 
 of suffrage is universal. 
 
 Example — The United States of North 
 America is the purest and most conspicuous 
 example of this form of government. 
 The object of the above table being to condense in as small a 
 space as possible only salient features it is necessarily very incom- 
 plete, and transitions and relapses are not brought out ; but that it 
 is a faithful representation of human progress in general no just 
 thinker can deny. The citizen of the great Republic may, with 
 
 VI. Self Rule. 
 (National life.) 
 
202 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 pardonable pride, look upon its institutions as the highest expres- 
 sion to which government has yet attained. 
 
 At the opening of history, Athens and Laced semon were ruled 
 by despots as absolute as any Persian Monarch, but, on the death 
 of Codrus, about 1068 B. C, a reform in the government was in- 
 stituted, and the so-called Athenian republic came into existence. 
 They abolished the title of king, while the magistrate whom they 
 put in his place had almost the same authority. They appointed 
 Medon, son of Codrus, chief magistrate, with the title of Archon, 
 or Ruler, and conferred on him the office for life, and even con- 
 tinued it hereditary in his family. The Republic was governed 
 for 331 years by a succession of perpetual Archons of the family 
 of Medon. The government was really a monarchy without the 
 name, and became in the end as irksome to the liberties of the 
 people. The perpetual arcbonship was then abolished, and the 
 office limited to ten years. But even this was found obnoxious 
 to the democratic feelings of the people. A Supreme Council of 
 Nine magistrates was now appointed, to be newly elected every 
 year. Of these the First was called by way of preeminence The 
 Archon, and gave his name to the current year in the state annals. 
 The Second Archon had the title of Basileus, (king,) and was at the 
 head of religious affairs ; the Third was called the Polemarch, and 
 presided over military operations. The remaining six archons were 
 termed T hesmothetai, and held the office of judges. The whole 
 body of nine formed the Supreme Council. But troubles again 
 arose, and the affairs of the country were once more thrown into 
 confusion. Draco, whose great virtues had raised him to the 
 dignity of chief archon, now attempted a settlement of the coun- 
 try. He abridged the authority of the Areopagus, and established 
 a new tribunal termed Ephetai. But they proved of short dura- 
 tion, and the country was once more given up to anarchy, which, 
 as usual, ended in the establishment of a tyranny. About the 
 year 594 B. C, Solon, a lineal descendant of Codrus, was unani- 
 mously, elected chief archon, and intrusted with the power to re- 
 form the government. He divided all the citizens into four classes. 
 In the first three were the richer citizens, and from these all the 
 offices of state were supplied. The fourth, much more numerous 
 than the other three together, had the right of suffrage in the pub- 
 lic assemblies. All affairs of importance concerning the state were 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 203 
 
 debated in these public meetings, and every citizen above the age 
 of fifty possessed the right of speaking. Laws were made, war de- 
 clared, and peace made in these assemblies; and such was the 
 superiority of the popular vote, that the supreme power became 
 vested in the masses of the people. This was found to have its 
 disadvantages, and, to lessen the difficulties of enacting laws and 
 determining important affairs of state, Solon established a Senate, 
 consisting of four hundred members, appointed from the most re- 
 spectable of the citizens. This body acted as a check upon the 
 popular meetings, and no measure could be placed before them ere 
 they had been canvassed by the Senate. As a further check upon 
 the popular assemblies, he re-instated the authority of the Areopa- 
 gus. To this body was intrusted, besides other important duties, 
 the care of the public treasury, and all expenditures were deter- 
 mined by them. History tells us that about this time the number 
 of citizens of the Athenian republic did not reach 20,000. The 
 remainder of the population consisted of slaves, of which there 
 were 400,000, and women and children. The slaves were either 
 the descendants of the original inhabitants or the victims of subse- 
 quent wars and conquests. 
 
 Such is a brief review of the Athenian government from the 
 earliest times down to the days of Solon. It will be seen that 
 during this period every form of government had been tried. A 
 similar condition of things existed in the other Grecian states and 
 at Home, and passed through about the same phases. The con- 
 solidation of the Grecian states under Philip initiated national 
 despotism, and the same took place in Rome under Augustus. 
 
 In glancing over the foregoing table, it may be objected that 
 France, being a republic, should not be classed with Germany, 
 which borders on a Despotism. Yet the government which pre- 
 vails in France to-day, notwithstanding the name of Republic, re- 
 sembles that of Germany more than that of the United States. 
 France is a centralized, military republic, and the system of things 
 whjch exists there to-day would not be supported in the United 
 States twenty-four hours. In assuming the name of Republic, 
 with an elective chief magistrate, she has still retained much of 
 the centralized machinery of Imperial rule ; and the surveillance 
 to which the individual is subjected is nearly as great as under the 
 Empire. There is to-day more individual freedom in England 
 
204 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 than there is in France, though the one bears the title of Monarchy, 
 and the other that of Republic. 
 
 The state of affairs in France is the result of convulsion, and 
 true Republican forms have not had time to supplant what was 
 left of the Empire. The hostile attitude of neighboring nations 
 has, in a measure, compelled her to retain the militant type. 
 
 The government of England is the result of gradual growth, in 
 which the power of the people has steadily asserted itself, and en- 
 croached more and more upon the prerogatives of the Crown. It 
 presents us, therefore, with a very peculiar state of things — with 
 a monarch who reigns, but who does not rule ; with an upper 
 and lower legislative body, of which the upper is inferior to the 
 lower. Indeed, the House of Lords clearly recognizes the fact 
 that its very existence depends upon its good behavior and acqui- 
 escence in all measures insisted upon by the Commons. The per- 
 petuity of the throne itself rests upon the same quiescent attitude; 
 and any attempt to extend its prerogatives, or even to assert, in 
 full measure, those allowed in the written constitution, would be 
 speedily followed by its abolition. 
 
 In England the government has outgrown its name, and a re- 
 public might now be established without the shedding of a drop 
 of blood. The chrysalis still remains attached to the fully devel- 
 oped insect, but these slender threads will soon be sundered, and 
 the new republic will rise on its glittering wings to higher regions 
 of development. The abolition of primogeniture and all titles 
 would result in a natural collapse of the privileged class, and this 
 would lead by easy steps to the setting aside of the throne, with- 
 out confusion or turmoil of any kind. The present incumbent 
 will, no doubt, be permitted to retain the shadow of royalty, but 
 her grandson will never, in all probability, sit upon an English 
 throne. 
 
 But democratic institutions will never succeed until the indi- 
 vidual components of the nation have reached that state of de- 
 velopment when they can govern themselves. A two-edged sword 
 in the hands of a child would not be more dangerous to its life 
 than self-government to those unprepared for it. 
 
 To insure this high degree of enlightenment general education 
 must be insisted upon, and every possible encouragement given 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 205 
 
 to the diffusion of healthy knowledge among the masses* Good 
 citizens are the only safeguards of Republican institutions, and 
 when they become apostates to their own high interests democracy 
 must give place to Despotism ; if a man cannot govern himself, 
 another must perform that office for him. The early republics 
 were perpetually running from one extreme to another. Anarchy 
 and Despotism share between them a greater part of Grecian and 
 Roman story ; and such must inevitably be the fate of every na- 
 tion in which the majority of the people are not civilized up to 
 self-government. 
 
 Despotic institutions may be likened to an arch, while a Re- 
 public may be compared with a pyramid ; the first is held together 
 by a power from above, the second is supported by strength from 
 below ; the first is in a perpetual condition of unstable equilibrium, 
 for the dislodgment of the keystone precipitates the whole in 
 ruins ; the second is the type of stability, for each stone of its broad 
 foundation lends its aid in supporting the superincumbent struc- 
 ture. 
 
 Republican institutions to be successful must be the result of 
 high enlightenment and gradual growth and not of sudden estab-, 
 lishment. The history of France, from the first republic to our 
 own times, sufficiently demonstrates this. 
 
 In the past one hundred years she has passed through every 
 possible form of government; from no government, but that of 
 anarchy, to the pitiless heel of Despotism, and back again to license 
 and lawlessness. Revolution and counter-revolution, plot and 
 counter-plot; now at the mercy of bloody-handed communism, 
 and now scourged by the iron rod of Imperialism; this distracted 
 country has been alike an example and a warning, the shame and 
 the glory of the civilized world. The first Republic, brought forth 
 
 * To the extraordinary development of Journalism must be attributed the 
 wide diffusion of knowledge among us. The influence of the press for good 
 cannot be exaggerated. Every citizen, above the plane of the absolute pauper, 
 reads the daily newspapers and learns to weigh matters of state policy as well 
 as affairs of mere local interest. So elevated is the general level of our people 
 that it is not too much to say that any town of moderate size might furnish 
 numerous individuals who could fill with credit the highest office in the gift 
 of the people. Contrast this state of things with the condition of affairs in 
 any European country. Italy contains a population of twenty-nine millions, 
 and of this vast population but one million subscribe for the daily journals. 
 
206 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 in blood and cradled in anarchy, merited its short-lived existence; 
 the second, less sanguinary and foully betrayed, endured but a 
 short time; the third, established, indeed, under gloomy circum- 
 stances, is now under trial, and we may cherish the hope that the 
 trial will be a successful one, and that the ship of the third Re- 
 public, now well launched, is destined to a long and prosperous 
 voyage. Much of the ballast which still weights her down will in 
 time be thrown overboard, and its place supplied by that which 
 will redound to the general good. The immense military arma- 
 ment with which she is encumbered, and which does so much to 
 retard her progress, will eventually be disbanded and the energy 
 which it represents turned into industrial channels, and an era of 
 content and prosperity, hitherto unknown in her history, will be 
 opened up. No true American who has in mind the traditions of 
 1776 will refuse the voice of sympathy to the nation which aided 
 us in the hour of utmost need. Between the countrymen of La- 
 Fayette and the countrymen of Washington there is an invisible 
 bond which time cannot weaken ; and in the noble statue of Lib- 
 erty, the gift of the French people to the people of America, which 
 is now in course of erection in the harbor of our chief commercial 
 mart, we have a testimonial of its present strength and a pledge 
 of its continuance. 
 
 Russia, Germany, Austria, and other European states, are now 
 passing through a crisis, and the forces of arbitrary power and 
 personal liberty are arraying themselves against one another. But 
 who that has followed the growth of democratic institutions for 
 the past three hundred years can doubt the issue of the contest? 
 
 The volcanic forces, birth of repression, which are now making 
 themselves felt through the length and breadth of Europe, are but 
 premonitions of the terrible catastrophe which is impending, and 
 should serve as a warning to those who seek to crush out personal 
 liberty by autocratic power. They should remember the fate of 
 France, and take heed ere it be too late. The red specter of Nihi- 
 lism, hideous compound of everything foul and unseemly, con- 
 ceived in ignorance and superstition, brought forth by oppression 
 and nurtured by Atheism, stalks abroad through Europe striking 
 terror to the hearts of men. 
 
 The enormous military establishments of Europe are sucking 
 the verv life-blood of the nations, and hundreds of thousands of 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 207 
 
 able-bodied men who might be engaged in developing the material 
 resources of their country are converted into non-producers, be- 
 coming so much dead weight upon the shoulders of those upon 
 whom the burden of producing depends. But the injury, great as 
 it is, does not stop here ; these men, taken from the healthy in- 
 fluences of the home circle at a tender age, are exposed to all the 
 demoralizing tendencies of a soldier's life, taught to look upon war 
 as the noblest occupation, and to thirst after distinctions which are 
 only to be purchased by the blood of their fellow-men. Under 
 the specious names of honor and glory, the most brutal passions 
 which can take possession of the human heart are set up and wor- 
 shipped ; and orders and decorations, the rewards of royal favor, 
 pour in upon him whose deeds might cause the tears of the re- 
 cording angel to flow. The justice of the cause, which is the only 
 redeeming feature of war, is too often utterly ignored ; and national 
 aggrandizement and love of conquest actuate the rulers, while de- 
 sire for personal distinction nerves the arm of the soldier. 
 
 All honor be to him who, to free his country from the foot of 
 the invader or to redress the wrongs of the oppressed, "bares his 
 bosom to the storm and rushes into the thickest of the Fight,'' 
 
 "'Tis the cause makes all, 
 Degrades or hallows courage in its fall.'' 
 
 Nothing so distinguishes the civilization of the United States, 
 above that of all other nations, as the disrepute into which the 
 military profession has fallen. It is subordinated, under all cir- 
 cumstances, to the civil authority. It is regarded as an instrument 
 which Justice holds in readiness to assert her dignity, and mete 
 out her decrees, but the instrument itself is made to feel that it is 
 as much an evil as any other which Justice is sometimes compelled 
 to use. It is a great deal for a nation to be able to say that love 
 of peace is the predominant passion of its citizens, and that its re- 
 wards and distinctions are held in higher esteem than the so-called 
 honors of war. With a power to shake the nations of the earth to 
 their very foundations, were it disposed to conquest, this country 
 possesses an armament just sufficient to police its thinly-settled 
 regions, and hold in ^heck a few wandering savages. 
 
 The United States, by her national strength, by her boundless 
 physical resources, by the high state of general civilization induced 
 by the wide diffusion of knowledge, and the noble spirit of inde- 
 
208 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 pendence which her institutions foster, claims, as her just right, the 
 van among the nations of the earth. She stands before the world a 
 proud example of the possibility of self-government, and has demon- 
 strated, beyond all doubt, that the race can only attain to its highest 
 development under the nurturing discipline of self-rule. 
 
 The child requires the arbitrary rule of Parental authority, but 
 as it grows in years and mental strength, the wise Parent relaxes, 
 more and more, that absolute authority which he was at first com- 
 pelled to exercise, and the child is taught the power of self-gov- 
 ernment as its capabilities increase ; and, finally, when it attains to 
 full manhood, the parent abdicates all authority, and recognizes in 
 its offspring the right of entire self-control. 
 
 He who can seriously doubt that self-government is the only 
 form under which the race can attain to its full development places 
 at defiance the teachings of analogy as well as those of experience. 
 "If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union, 
 or to change its Kepublican form, let them stand, undisturbed, as 
 monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tol- 
 erated where reason is left free to combat it." * 
 
 The part which this nation is called upon to play, in furthering 
 the progress of the race, is a grand one. But little over an hundred 
 years have elapsed since she assumed national existence, and gave 
 to the world, through the pen of her greatest statesman, that pro- 
 clamation which will ever remain unique as the proudest declara- 
 tion of the rights of man. Though young in years she is old in 
 strength and wisdom. One of the high missions which this nation 
 is called upon to fill, and for which her enormous strength so aptly 
 adapts her, is the diffusion of the love of peace and its mainte- 
 nance. Whilst the United States has virtually reduced its military 
 establishment to a police force, it has not yet put the finishing 
 stroke to its peace policy ; so long as the names of army and navy 
 remain, so long will they be stumbling-blocks in the path of her 
 mission. As a defensive force, both by sea and by land, is an ab- 
 solute national necessity, so long as external enemies exist, it re- 
 mains for us to show to the world that this armament is nothing 
 more than a national police from which the barbarous thirst for 
 military renown has been entirely eliminated. Nor need we fear 
 
 * Thomas Jeffe rson. 
 
Development of Governmental Institutions. 209 
 
 that the entire abolition of this military spirit will tend, in any 
 way. to destroy the efficiency of a national police in time of war ; 
 on the contrary, feelings of 'patriotism and a high sense of duty 
 are more to be relied upon in the hour of emergency than the 
 courage which is stimulated by the desire for personal distinction. 
 
 The spirit which supported our ancestors in the darkest hours 
 of the Revolution was far different from that which swelled the 
 huge hosts of Napoleon, and carried them to the frozen plains of 
 Russia ! We can well afford to let die feelings which are degrad- 
 ing to every enlightened and civilized nation. The most efficient 
 man in times of war is not he who seeks amid the smoke and 
 carnage of battle the blood-stained laurels of renown or the baton 
 of command, but he who detests his occupation, and who is com- 
 pelled thereto by high and pure motives, the defense of home and 
 country. 
 
 The glitter and show thrown around the military profession 
 among the nations of Europe are intended to keep alive the war-like 
 spirit; but, in spite of all efforts to the contrary, it is rapidly dis- 
 appearing. The collective wisdom of the race is too powerful to 
 be overthrown by narrow and selfish rulers. 
 
 "Old Might to Right is yielding, battle-blade to clerkly pen, 
 Earth's monarchs are her peoples, and her serfs stand up as men." 
 
 The titles of army and navy should be abolished from among 
 us. There is a great deal in names, and the associations which 
 surround them. In the United States the public feeling against 
 maintaining an army and navy is so great that these branches are 
 in danger of extinction, and the country left without any national 
 organization for defense in cases of emergency. But the feelings 
 directed against the army and navy would have no place in the 
 public mind where a national police was concerned. Congress 
 would not hesitate to vote two millions for national defense where 
 it now begrudges one for the maintenance of army and navy. 
 Much of the useless machinery which now characterizes these latter 
 organizations would, of course, be done away with, an^ the whole 
 reduced to a more solid and efficient basis. 
 
 14 
 
210 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Section V. 
 
 Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 
 
 The study of humanity, both in the past and in its existing sav- 
 age states, shows us that the Eeligious sentiment precedes the de- 
 velopment of ideas of right living, or Morality ; and that the one 
 stands toward the other in the relation of Parent and Child. ' 
 
 With the recognition of the existence of some Superior Being 
 or Beings, religion commences ; with the endeavor to guide per- 
 sonal conduct by the supposed wishes or commands of this Superior 
 Being or Beings, morality is initiated. Morality, in Primitive Man 
 or the Savage, is Practical Religion. The religious sentiment 
 prompts to true worship, when based on gratitude for benefits re- 
 ceived ; to propitiation, when to appease anger or ward off evils. 
 
 As the fruit of religion is the moral sentiment, (i <?., desire to 
 please,) so the fruit of the moral sentiment is practical morality ; 
 and this pre-supposes a knowledge, or supposed knowledge, of the 
 wishes of these Superior Beings. Such knowledge, or supposed 
 knowledge, will be so vague, indefinite, and shifting, where there 
 exist a multitude of such Superior Beings, that a definite moral 
 standard can never be recognized, (as among savages generally ; ) 
 but when these beings are fewer in number more distinct ideas of 
 conduct will arise. The character of the standard will depend upon 
 the conception of the nature of these Superior Beings; thus, the 
 height and purity of a Moral Code will be commensurate with the 
 height and purity of the religion which gave it birth. 
 
 No Savage people has yet been discovered in whom there is a 
 total absence of the Religious sentiment, and some vague notions 
 of proper conduct, (as measured by their standard; ) and the study 
 of these savage religions and moralities may throw some light upon 
 the genesis of the religious and moral feelings in primitive times. 
 
 In the attractive affinity existing between parent and offspring, 
 and which is observable among brutes as well as among men, we 
 may recognize the conditions under which the religious sentiment 
 arose. Among the brutes the instinct that leads the parent to 
 watch over and protect its offspring, and which draws the offspring 
 to seek the protection of its parent, is essential to the well-being 
 of the species. This protection on the part of the parent and 
 filial recognition on the part of the offspring continue until the 
 
Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 211 
 
 latter can care for itself. All relations between the two then cease; 
 the parent goes one way and the offspring another, and no trace of 
 the previous connection remains in the memory of either. As we 
 ascend the scale of animal life, these relations become more and 
 more marked and durable until, in man, we see them reach their 
 climax. 
 
 The veneration in which the parent was held during life would 
 endure after death had sundered the relations between them, and 
 lead the ignorant and superstitious mind of the Primitive Man to 
 attribute after benefits or injuries, brought about through natural 
 agents, to the approval or anger of the departed. Natural phe- 
 nomena thus becoming indelibly associated with the memory of the 
 dead, there would gradually arise a personification of these natural 
 powers, and a religion, in which the memory of ancestors would be 
 blended with the phenomena of nature, would be the result The 
 religions of the lowest existing savages, in which we behold this 
 union of Ghost or Ancestral worship and Nature worship, would 
 naturally lead us to infer that such was the genesis of religious 
 observances in primitive man prior to Revelation, 
 
 The religions which greet us at the dawn of history among the 
 Egyptians, Chaldees, and Hindoos, and in China and Japan, down 
 to the present time, furnish us with corroborative testimony. In 
 China and Japan ancestral worship still enters largely into their 
 religious feelings and observances. The " Feast of the Lantern," 
 which consists in decorating the graves with innumerable lights, 
 and placing food near at hand for the spirits of the departed, is 
 still celebrated among them. 
 
 The author of this work spent two years traveling in these 
 countries, and enjoyed an opportunity of witnessing this curious 
 and interesting spectacle. Among the ancient Egyptians a similar 
 festival was celebrated under the name of the "Feasts of the 
 Lights." It is more than probable that the custom in both coun- 
 tries had its origin from a common source. 
 
 Fetich and Idol worship, so common among savages, are merely 
 phases of ancestral worship. Anything belonging to some one 
 highly venerated, a fragment of bone, a lock of hair, &c, would 
 be prized as being a part of the deceased, and might in time come 
 to be objects of worship as possessing the spirit of the departed — 
 thus Fetich worship would arise. An attempt to reproduce an 
 
212 Evolution versus Involution, 
 
 image of the departed by rude carving in stone and wood would 
 lead directly to Idol worship. Among existing savages and an- 
 cient nations, we find more or less of a blending of all these various 
 forms of religion, but filial veneration furnished the foundation for 
 them all. 
 
 The conspicuous objects and phenomena of nature coming in 
 time to be special objects of worship would be classed as good and 
 evil spirits, according to their effect upon the well-being of the 
 individual. Those agents which brought in their train beneficial 
 influences would excite gratitude, and be denominated good spirits ; 
 those which caused terror, pain, and death would be called evil, 
 and here propitiation would take the place of true worship. 
 
 Whilst the moral sentiment, which has been defined as the de- 
 sire to shape life according to some conceived principle of right, 
 exists among the lowest savages, still a definite, formulated code 
 of conduct can have no place where there are a multitude of Beings 
 of diverse characters to please, for the observances pleasing to one 
 would not be pleasing to another; hence, among all nations where 
 Polytheism exists we find no consistent or fixed Eules of Life. 
 Conduct is shifting and conflicting, and every act that might be 
 committed may be regarded by the religious savage as acceptable 
 to some one of his many gods. -Among the Egyptians, Greeks, 
 and Romans the conduct of the worshipper was guided by the 
 character of the particular deity whom he wished to serve. Mur- 
 der, rape, theft, lying, &c, could all be covered by one or more of 
 their innumerable gods. Jupiter, the chief of the Olympians, was 
 a notorious libertine, and resorted to the lowest subterfuges to 
 carry his base ends; Mercury was a professional thief, and Venus 
 was anything but a lady ; and so we might run through the whole 
 catalogue of gods and goddesses with much the same result. And 
 these were the Deities of the common people. 
 
 The little true morality that did exist among the masses of the 
 Greeks and Romans was the result of state enactments based upon 
 light which their wise men had received from the Orient, the 
 cradle of the True religion. At the dawn of history we already 
 behold the light of revelation flooding the world, and the Mosaic 
 law embodied in the Ten Commandments is steadily asserting its 
 sacred influence and fulfilling its Divine mission. From it, as 
 from a font, have flowed the streams of morality which found their 
 
Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 213 
 
 way to China prior to the days of Confucius ; to India, and brought 
 forth what there was of good iu the Institutes of Menu, and later, 
 caused Siddartha to renounce the pomp and vanities of life to seek 
 in the solitude of the wilderness that enlightenment which enabled 
 him to exercise such a powerful influence throughout India; to 
 Persia, where it found vent in the Sacred Zendavesta ; to Egypt, 
 to Phoenicia, and to Greece, where it nourished the wisdom of her 
 greatest sages and enabled Plato to reach those lofty heights which 
 succeeding generations, unsupported by Divine inspiration, have 
 vainly aspired to. 
 
 Belief in the existence of One, Supreme, Spiritual (non-material) 
 Being, the Author and Sustainer of all nature, is one so abstract, 
 so refined, and so exalted that it requires a high degree of mental 
 development to entertain it, much less to originate it. Even in 
 these latter days, with all the light of revelation streaming upon 
 us from the past, and among those who are the recognized leaders 
 of scientific thought, this belief is rejected. When we behold 
 such men either positively denying the existence of a Beneficent 
 Creator, or, under the title of Agnostics, holding aloof from the 
 acceptance of it, we should not be surprised that the unaided 
 powers of early man failed to reach such sublime heights. From 
 the contemplation of what we see in our own times, we should be 
 prepared to anticipate the necessity for some direct and unmistakable 
 revelation. 
 
 The strongest extrinsic argument for the truth of Revelation lies 
 just here: that if there be a Being who is not the Universe, but 
 the Author of it, He would not permit the rational creatures whom 
 He has called into being to grope helplessly along in search of 
 Him without some revelation of Himself. The warrant for this 
 belief is deeply seated in the consciousness of us all, and, unless 
 we willfully close our eyes to the great truth, no one, however low 
 his intelligence, can fail to recognize it. 
 
 The religions of the primitive man are the blind gropings of the 
 Child after its Parent, and who that believes in the existence of 
 that Parent can fail to believe that He would make known His 
 presence. To the earnest seeker after truth the issue of this great 
 question might be allowed to hang upon this single argument ; its 
 strength appeals to such a mind with absolutely irresistible force. 
 This irrepressible longing after the cause of its being, which is in- 
 
214 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 nate in every human soul, however degraded, and which always 
 develops into worship if not willfully smothered, has been planted 
 there and is the highest truth known to man. 
 
 There is /Something that governs the constitution of the mineral 
 which compels its atoms to arrange themselves around certain axes 
 of crystallization, and almost every mineral has some crystalline form 
 which serves to distinguish it from all others; there is Something 
 that governs the constitution of the plant, which causes the atoms 
 of the inorganic matter of the crystal to assume other relations, 
 one to the other, and the phenomena of Vegetable Life result: 
 there is Something that governs the constitution of the animal that 
 causes these atoms to assume quite other relations, and the phe- 
 nomena of Animal life are exhibited ; there are still other Some- 
 things which stamp each form of vegetable and animal life with 
 features peculiar to itself. Thus, there are animals which micro- 
 scopically and chemically cannot be distinguished from a bit of 
 albumen, and from this lowest form to the highest there is an in- 
 finite series of gradations. New Somethings have been constantly 
 at work, bringing the atoms to higher and higher relations, enabling 
 these new Somethings to manifest their existence to man's reason- 
 ing faculty. Every advance step made was in obedience to some 
 new Something impressed upon the atoms. 
 
 The various forms of Life made their appearance one after, 
 another, each manifesting something different from its predecessor, 
 until we reach the highest. The Something peculiar to man led 
 him to seek after the author of his being ; it aroused within him 
 the consciousness of right and ivrong, and taught him to look upon 
 himself as a free agent, that he was at liberty to act or not to act, 
 to accept or to reject. This Something has received the name of 
 Soul, and in it we recognize the essential nature of man ; that 
 which converted the mass of bones, nerves, and blood-vessels of 
 the animal into what we call a man. 
 
 The Moral Principle in man, by means of which he arrives at a 
 knowledge of what he Ought to do, (that is, whether he acts ac- 
 cording to the spirit of the standard he accepts,) in direct opposi- 
 tion to the calls of self-interest, which might point in an opposite 
 direction, constitutes, as far as we are able to determine, his grand 
 distinguishing feature. We have no reason to think that any such 
 Principle exists in the brute creation, and hence, to them we as 
 
Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 215 
 
 cribe no moral responsibility. They cannot be guilty of wrong- 
 doing, and with them the laws of material expediency reign Su- 
 preme. But with the imposition of the moral principle upon the 
 animal nature, a new Being came into existence, and Man, with all 
 his longings and aspirations, and power to discriminate between 
 the Right and the Wrong (according to his standard) stepped upon 
 the theater of creation. 
 
 The brute elements gradually gave way as the new principle 
 advanced, and this inward progress, assisted by the improved ex- 
 ternal environment, was soon reflected in the amelioration and 
 elevation of his material condition. The powers of self-improve- 
 ment with which he had been endowed enabled him to widen, 
 with increasing rapidity, the gulf which separated him from the 
 brute ; and in proportion as his mental state developed, did he lay 
 under tribute those forces of external nature before which he or- 
 iginally stood in awe. 
 
 The religious feeling awakened in him by the promptings of his 
 higher nature and by the contemplation of external forces which 
 he could not understand, and which he at first regarded with terror, 
 gradually became more and more elevated with advancing knowl- 
 edge. When, in the fullness of time, he had reached that period 
 in his growth which fitted him for the reception of the highest 
 Truths, those truths were revealed to him ; and the conduct of his 
 life, which had before been conflicting and uncertain, was now di- 
 rected by a fixed and consistent code, which, in its completeness, 
 subtends the highest state of development of which we can con- 
 ceive his nature capable ; while, at the same time, his higher spir- 
 itual needs were supplied by being turned to the contemplation of 
 a Non-material, Eternal Essence, as the Author of his Being. 
 
 If it be granted that there is a Being or Power which is not the 
 Universe, but the Author of it, and if it be further granted that 
 there exists in a single human soul an impulse which leads it to 
 search out this Being, then it must also be granted that this Impulse 
 was placed in Man by this Uncaused Being. But if this impulse 
 owes its origin to the Uncaused Being, is it rational to assume that 
 He (the pronoun He is a more honorable title than It) would permit 
 this feeling to die away into naught and remain unfulfilled? On 
 the contrary, is it not in the highest degree rational that the Un- 
 caused Being would so manifest Himself to Man as to render His 
 
216 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 existence unmistakable? But how could such a revelation be made 
 to Man except through such avenues as would render it impossible for 
 him to confound the revelation with the Phenomena of Nature? 
 
 Let us steady ourselves before this great question and look it 
 squarely in the face. What method would the Supreme One be 
 likely to choose to make known his existence to Man ? Would it 
 be through the medium of material phenomena ? Obviously not, 
 for such a revelation would most certainly be confounded with the 
 ordinary phenomena of the material world, and it would be of no 
 avail in awakening man's understanding to a comprehension of its 
 true nature. Howsoever fierce the elements might rage, the earth- 
 quake, the lightning flash, and the thunder roll, there could be no 
 echoing response in the mind of man except that of blind terror. 
 There would be nothing in these material forces to appeal to his 
 understanding as the revelation of the existence of his Maker. A 
 Superior Being, then, if it wished to impress an Inferior with the 
 knowledge of its Superiority, would select some method which 
 would appeal to the understanding of that Inferior, through the 
 medium of its highest faculties. It is rational to suppose, therefore, 
 that the Supreme Being would select human language and human 
 Intelligence in communicating with Man, and not the language of 
 lower nature which is manifested to us in the phenomena of exter- 
 nal world. Amid the thunders and lightning of Sinai Moses 
 might have been overcome with awe and terror, but had not a 
 voice, in human language, spoken to his understanding, the world 
 would have remained shrouded in darkness, and man would still 
 be groping helplessly along without one ray to illuminate his path. 
 Without that voice the thunder and lightning of Sinai would have 
 signified nothing more to Moses than the raging of the elements. 
 Furthermore, had the language been other than his own how would 
 he have been able to discriminate between its (to him) unintelli- 
 gent mutterings and the undertones of the pealing thunder ? He 
 who recognizes the existence of a Being distinct from the Universe 
 and the Author of it, and still maintains that no revelation has 
 been made to man other than that which is manifested in the Ma- 
 terial Creation external to Man, forfeits his claim to be considered 
 a sound reasoner. 
 
 The human mind estimates the dignity of things by the charac- 
 ter of the impressions received and the direction whence they come. 
 
Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 217 
 
 If these impressions are received via the phenomena of what we 
 call the lower creation, then the object whence the impressions 
 proceed is looked upon as belonging to the lower world ; but if 
 the impressions come via man's higher faculties, the object is re- 
 garded as Intelligent, and is esteemed accordingly. 
 
 If therefore, it be granted that human Intelligence and Language 
 are the Highest Phenomena which the world presents, and if it be 
 further granted thai it is rationed to assume that the Uncaused Source 
 of things would make a revelation of His Existence, then it must be 
 granted, by all the laws of reason, that Man would be appealed to 
 through the medium of Intelligence and Human Language. 
 
 The earliest written records of the race demonstrate that Man, 
 even at that early period, had attained to a knowledge of the ONE 
 Supreme Being, and these records claim that this knowledge was 
 a direct revelation through the medium of human language. The 
 wisdom of the Jews, Chaldees, Hindoos, Egyptians, and Chinese 
 evidently had its origin from a Single Source. The great similarity 
 which is traceable in much of their moral teaching and traditions 
 would, of itself, indicate this. This unity of origin of the moral 
 codes of early nations and the great truth, that whilst mankind has 
 developed in every other direction, but has not evolved a Higher 
 Code than the one which has been handed down from the dim 
 shadows of the past, tend to strengthen the belief that, originally, 
 this moral code was not the result of a gradual development, but 
 of the nature of a direct revelation. 
 
 That great progress has been made in the practice of morality 
 by the masses, is beyond dispute, but to the moral code itself 
 nothing has been added during over three thousand years of de- 
 velopment. 
 
 Sir James Mackentosh was so struck with the stationary character 
 of moral principles that he affirmed that no further advance can 
 be made in morals. He says : " Morality admits no discoveries. 
 * * ■* * * More than three thousand years have elapsed 
 since the composition of the Pentateuch ; and let any man, if he 
 is able, tell me in what important respect the rule of life has 
 varied since that period. Let the Institutes of Menu be explored 
 with the same view ; we shall arrive at the same conclusion. Let 
 the books of false religion be opened; it will be found that their 
 moral svstem is in all its grand features the same." 
 
218 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Why is it that man, who has made such tremendous strides in 
 all things else, has yet been unable to add one jot or tittle to those 
 commandments which Moses declared unto the children of Israel ? 
 Even He who suffered on Calvary claimed only to have fulfilled 
 the Law, and not to have added to its amplitude. In His life He 
 illustrated the possibilities of humanity, and in His teachings He 
 showed the scope of the moral law. 
 
 " Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; 
 I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. 
 
 '' For verily, I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot 
 or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled." 
 
 The fundamental character and eternal fitness of the Ten com- 
 mands to fill man's highest needs are illustrated with greater and 
 greater force as civilization advances. Society is progressing along 
 the road to which they serve as beacons, and with every advancing 
 step the validity of their claim to be considered the only sure 
 guides of human conduct becomes more and more apparent. 
 Looking back upon the past, we can appreciate the tremendous 
 strides which man has made, and, projecting ourselves into the 
 future, we may form a vague conception of that state of Society 
 when the law shall be fulfilled in the life of each individual mem- 
 ber thereof. A people guided wholly by these teachings would 
 form a community besides which the most sanguine speculations 
 of modern thinkers pale into insignificance. What child of ten 
 summers cannot repeat from memory these ten commandments? 
 But where is the mind that can measure their length and breadth, 
 and sound their height and depth ? He alone who had no where 
 to lay His head, and suffered the agonies of an ignominious death, 
 has given us its full measure and taught us its deeper meanings. 
 
 1. U I am the Lord thy God. ***** Thou shalt have 
 no other gods BEFORE ME." 
 
 In this preamble we have a distinct declaration of the oneness 
 and Supreme character of the Law Giver, and are warned that the 
 fealty which is due Him, and Him alone, is not to be given to any 
 other Being whatsoever — that we are to look up to Him as the 
 highest, and the Author and Sustainer of the Universe. 
 
 2. u Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any like- 
 ness (Symbol) of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the 
 
Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 219 
 
 Earth beneath, or that is in the water under the Earth. Thou shalt 
 not how doion thyself to them, nor serve them."' 
 
 This second command calls upon us to contemplate the Divine 
 Being as non-material in His nature, and carries with it, by impli- 
 cation, that all attempts to represent Him to the understanding 
 through the medium of what we call material things is both a re- 
 flection upon the Eternal One, and debasing to ourselves. 
 
 The confounding of the Symbol with the true nature of the 
 thing symbolized is too often the result of the use of such symbol ; 
 not only among the ignorant and superstitious, but even among 
 those who lay claim to the highest attainments. The polytheism 
 into which the Israelites subsequently fell, and the numerous gods 
 of the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans, furnish illustrations of 
 what followed the violation of this law. In our own times we 
 have a still more striking illustration of 'the same fact. From 
 looking upon the Universe, with its blending of Matter and 
 Force,* as a symbol of that which lies beneath — as the expression to 
 our consciousness of an Eternally existing Ideal — the speculative 
 mind of to-day has become so absorbed in the stud}- of this sym- 
 bol that, losing sight of the true relations of things, it has con- 
 founded this outward expression with the Divine Being Himself ; 
 and Pantheism or Atheism (for in essential nature they are the 
 same) is the natural result. The old Egyptian bowed down before 
 Matter in detail, (for his gods were innumerable,) and with rever- 
 ence ; the modern Pantheist has consolidated all the gods of Egypt 
 into one, and bows down to matter and its attributes as a whole — 
 but not with reverence ! 
 
 Judged by the canons of sound philosophy, the Pantheist stands 
 convicted of folly and inconsistency as compared with the old 
 Egyptian whom he affects to despise ! Vanity of Vanities ! ! 
 
 3. " Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for 
 the Lord will not hold him guiltless that tdketh his name in vain.' 1 
 
 Nothing tends so much to diminish the reverential awe in which 
 a thing is held as to invoke it lightly on inconsequent occasions. 
 This command, therefore, enjoins upon us to regard with deepest 
 veneration that name which usage has made the cognomen of the 
 Divine Being and which worship has consecrated, and only to 
 permit it to pass our lips with the most exalted feelings of rever- 
 
 * Or by whatsoever titles we choose to designate what we see around us. 
 
220 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 ence. Among the ancient Hebrews, the word Jehovah was re- 
 garded with such sanctity that it was only used on occasions of 
 the highest ceremony. 
 
 Much of the practical Atheism among men is directly traceable 
 to their flippant use of a word which early instruction has taught 
 them to regard as sacred. Disregard of the word is soon followed 
 by disregard of what it represents, and Atheism is the result. The 
 mind that does not devote some portion of its time to the contem- 
 plation of higher things is truly atheistical in its attitude. 
 
 The importance of the strict observance of this law cannot, there- 
 fore, be exaggerated. 
 
 4. " Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shall thou 
 labor and do all thy work.'' 1 
 
 The profound practical wisdom underlying this command is 
 verified by every-day experience. That at least one day in seven 
 should be devoted to relaxation, both of body and mind, does not 
 require the learning of the physiologist to convince us, for every 
 one subjected to six days' continuous toil is willing to testify that 
 the seventh comes as a welcome haven of rest. The conservation 
 of the vital energies is of the utmost importance to the well-being 
 of the individual, and, therefore, of the nation, of which he is a 
 component part. And it is even of still wider significance ; for 
 the physical weakness incurred by unremitting toil is entailed 
 upon posterity, and if ensuing generations should pursue the same 
 policy it would only be a question of time when physical degen- 
 eracy would cause the extermination of the race. 
 
 The importance of the injunction to set apart that one day for 
 the special contemplation of higher things, or, in other words, to 
 keep it holy, can be fully appreciated by comparing the moral de- 
 velopment of a community where this law is regarded and one 
 where it receives no observance. The cessation of all labor is a 
 physical necessity, and the proper observance of the day is no 
 less a moral necessity. Violation of either law must inevitably be 
 followed by retrogression. 
 
 5. " Honor thy father and thy mother." 
 
 The family is the unit of society, and upon the teachings there 
 inculcated and fostered hang the welfare of the State. The ob- 
 servance of this command stimulates the growth of all those virtues 
 which make society possible; it furnishes the foundation upon 
 
Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 221 
 
 which the superstructure must rest. Among the brutes a certain 
 kind of affection may be said to subsist between the parent and 
 the young, but the tie is broken as soon as the offspring is suffi- 
 ciently mature to take care of itself. Among many low savage 
 tribes the filial and parental feelings are but poorly developed, 
 and the aged and infirm are often allowed to die in neglect and 
 destitution. 
 
 This command, therefore, is the very corner-stone of the social 
 edifice, and its strict observance, by developing all the kindty 
 sympathies of human nature, will almost insure a regard for the 
 five commands which follow. 
 
 6. "Thou shall not kill" 
 
 That petty warfare which is almost universal in the savage state, 
 where every man's hand at the slightest provocation is turned 
 against his fellow, has happily diminished with advancing civili- 
 zation, and among the representative peoples of the earth it is no 
 longer considered an enviable distinction for a man to be able to 
 boast of the number of fellow-creatures whom he has slain. In- 
 deed, among us individual violation of this law is of rare occur- 
 rence as compared with the savage state and retributive justice 
 soon overtakes the murderer. But this command not only applies 
 to the individual ; it applies with equal force to a plurality of in- 
 dividuals banded together as a community or as a nation. Murder 
 committed by an individual and murder committed by a nation 
 only differs in the magnitude or extent of the crime and the diffi- 
 culty of identifying the criminal or criminals. 
 
 The responsibility of the wholesale murder of which nations are 
 still guilty is referable to the rulers of the nations concerned. The 
 human automata who hack and hew one another in pieces on the 
 field of battle and call it glory, may be, and generally are, abso- 
 lutely ignorant of the causes of the quarrel which arrayed them 
 against their fellows in deadly combat. They but obey the com- 
 mands of superiors, and upon their rulers the crime must rest. 
 These same rulers would shrink with horror at the bare suggestion 
 of imbruing their hands in the blood -of another, yet they hesitate 
 not, for some petty offense, to embroil their country in a war 
 which may involve the death of thousands. The\ T foster the war- 
 like spirit among men by holding out great rewards for achieve- 
 ments whose importance is rated by the number of dead bodies 
 
222 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 which strew the plain. The poet, too, has lent his "sacred lire," 
 exhausting the rythm of language and the stores of fancy to throw 
 a false halo over deeds that are only to be compared with the wild 
 ragings of ferocious wild beasts. War is only justifiable in self- 
 defense and to redress grievous wrongs, and over its ensanguined 
 deeds the veil of oblivion should be drawn, not the triumphal arch 
 reared nor the pen of the poet invoked to sing the glories of vic- 
 torious violence. But the advance of civilization has wrought 
 wonders in destroying the war-like spirit among men. In the Val- 
 halla of the old Scandinavian we behold the ferocity of that early 
 period projected into a future state, and the happy warrior who 
 died in battle was received into this sanguinary paradise, where, 
 for all future time, his happiness was to consist in everlasting 
 carnage and drinking great bouts from the skulls of enemies slain 
 in battle by way of refreshment. To the softening influence of 
 Christianity, the revival of learning, the invention of printing and 
 gunpowder, and the application of steam for purposes of locomo- 
 tion are to be attributed the rapid decline of that war-like spirit 
 which, during the middle ages, converted the whole of Europe 
 into one vast battle-ground for contending armies. In our own 
 times war is, comparatively speaking, of uncommon occurrence. 
 The great nations of the earth no longer enter into conflicts with 
 the avowed purpose of conquest, and if this be the ulterior motive 
 still an outward regard for decency and justice constrains them to 
 fabricate some pretext under which to cloak their true design. To 
 the superficial observer ignorant of history the armed hosts of 
 Europe would seem to refute the assertion that the war-like spirit 
 is on the decline. But such is, nevertheless, the case. The gen- 
 eral diffusion of knowledge is constantly increasing the number of 
 the intellectual class and widening the bounds of their influence, 
 and the growth of commerce, manufacture, and other industrial 
 pursuits are rapidly multiplying the number of those interested in 
 preserving peace. 
 
 As man's higher powers develop, he becomes more and more 
 averse to an occupation where the brute elements of his nature 
 are brought into play to the almost entire exclusion of the exer- 
 cise of those nobler faculties upon which all moral and material 
 advancement depend. Europe of to day presents to us a transi- 
 tion stage, and her armed hosts are but the expression of autocratic 
 
Developme/it of Religious and Moral Institutions. 223 
 
 power bent on maintaining the prestige of Imperial rule. It is 
 not the individual lust for war and conquest which swells the 
 huge armies of modern Europe, but the edict of Despotism, which, 
 seeing in the signs of the times the brief tenure of its power, at- 
 tempts to avert the approaching inevitable by stirring up external 
 strife, thus hoping to turn the thoughts of the people from the 
 contemplation of their own debased condition. 
 
 Were ninety -nine out of every hundred of the men who are now 
 under arms in Europe given the choice they would disband to- 
 morrow, and, returning to their homes, engage in the useful pur- 
 suits of peace. But to them no choice is given. Forced to shoulder 
 the bayonet at the point of the bayonet they must either obey as 
 slaves or, rising in rebellion, throw off the yoke of personal rule 
 and assume the government themselves. Every effort is being 
 made by European rulers to foster the decaying military spirit, 
 but as well might they essay to controvert the laws of nature as 
 to attempt to stem the tide of human progress and turn it back 
 into its original barbaric channels. The measure of their crimes 
 is nearly full. "The mills of the gods grind slowly, but they 
 grind exceeding small," and retributive justice sleeps not! The 
 moral law must be fulfilled among the nations as well as with in- 
 dividuals, and even now, though thick war-clouds envelope the 
 horizon, the discerning eye, by the aid of the light which sheds 
 its rays into the future from the past, may catch a glimpse of a 
 new and brighter era. 
 
 The universal peace which reigned on the earth at the Nativity, 
 and of which the great poet sings, may be looked upon as an 
 earnest of the future fulfillment of this moral law. 
 
 "No war, or battle's sound, 
 Was heard the world around; 
 The idle spear and shield were high up hung; 
 The hooked chariot stood 
 Unstain'd with hostile blood : 
 The trumpet spake not to the arme'd throng; 
 And kings sat still with awful eye, 
 As if they surely knew their sov'reign Lord was by. 
 
 But peaceful was the night, 
 
 Wherein the Prince of Light 
 
 His reign of peace upon the earth began : 
 
 The winds, with wonder whist, 
 

 224 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Smoothly the waters kias'd, 
 
 AVhispering new joys to the mild ocean, 
 
 Who now hath quite forgot to rave, 
 
 While birds of calm sit brooding on the charmed wave. 
 
 Yea, truth and justice then 
 
 Will down return to men, 
 
 Orb'd in a rainbow ; and, like glories wearing, 
 
 Merc v v will sit between, 
 
 Throned in celestial sheen, 
 
 With radiant feet the tissued clouds down steering ; 
 
 And heaven, as at some festival, 
 
 Will open wide the gates of her high palace hall." 
 
 7. " Thou shalt not commit Adultery." 
 
 This law must be interpreted as not only forbidding that pro- 
 miscuous intercourse which exists among brutes, but also as car- 
 rying with it the injunction to have but one wife and one husband ; 
 for only under these restricted bounds do the domestic virtues at- 
 tain to their highest development. Through the working of this 
 law, woman has been gradually elevated from the position of a de- 
 graded slave to become man's companion and friend, lending her 
 aid and encouragement in the struggles of life. Whether Moses 
 fully appreciated the great truth that man could only attain to his 
 highest elevation by restricting himself to one wife, is uncertain ; 
 but, whether he did or did not, its existence at that early period 
 is altogether inexplicable, except on the ground of inspiration. 
 Among Christian nations, monogamy is recognized as the only true 
 condition under which men should live, and to its prevalence among 
 them must be attributed one of the causes of the high civilization 
 to which they have attained. Among Eastern nations, polyganvy 
 is not only sanctioned but it is the rule with those who can afford 
 it ; the result has been that they have either stood still, or even 
 retrograded, in the scale of civilization. The almost universal 
 disregard of this law among them has furnished no opportunity 
 for the development of those lofty sentiments of affection between 
 husband and wife which form such a striking feature of our own 
 civilization. Those feelings, which in the brute and the savage 
 serve to insure the propagation of the race, have been refined and 
 spiritualized to a degree which the barbarous nations of the Earth 
 cannot understand. 
 
 The influence of this lofty feeling of love upon the destinies of 
 
Development of Religious and Moral Institutions. 225 
 
 men cannot be exaggerated. Its potent power to elevate and en- 
 noble the base maybe traced in individual members of every com- 
 munity. The dissolute and the profligate, under its powerful in- 
 fluence, are lifted from the slough into an atmosphere of such 
 purity that their whole inner nature becomes renewed, and the en- 
 tire man is lifted to a higher plane. What is true of the individual 
 is true of society. Polygamy renders the existence of these feel- 
 ings an impossibility, and in their stead are cherished those baser 
 passions which we possess in common with the brute ; hence, a 
 high state of society and Polygamy arc absolutely incompatible. 
 The existence of this law, at a time when Polygamy was univer- 
 sally practiced, for even the Great King Solomon was possessed of 
 three hundred wives and seven hundred concubines, demonstrates 
 that its originator had in view the highest possible spiritual eleva- 
 tion of the race. 
 
 8. " Thou shalt not Steal" 
 
 This command not only embraces the surreptitious taking which 
 is called stealing or theft, but it includes all manner of taking 
 from another without his consent. This command has for its basis 
 the eternal laws of Equity and Justice. The necessity and utility 
 of this law, with reference to the individual, is recognized among 
 all civilized people and many savages, but its binding power upon 
 large bodies of men, as a nation, is not so universally conceded* 
 But the nation that takes from another nation without just cause 
 and without its consent violates this law as much as the midnight 
 pilferer who steals his neighbor's goods, the only difference being in 
 the extent of the damage done. Theft, on the part of nations, is 
 now carried on with a certain regard to decency, and among civil- 
 ized nations some pretext, however superficial, is the guise under 
 which it is committed. This regard for the abstract principles of 
 equity and justice which now prevails among the most advanced 
 nations enables us to appreciate the great progress which mankind 
 has made in the observance of this law in the past few hundred 
 years. The shameful partition of Poland and the gradual absorp- 
 tion of India by England are the most glaring thefts, on a large 
 scale, since the time of that highway robber, Napoleon the First 
 
 In spite of the innumerable violations committed both by single 
 individuals and individuals banded together as a nation, the stricter 
 observance of this law is making daily progress. 
 15 
 
226 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 9. " Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." 
 Which, being further interpreted, means thou shalt not practice 
 
 falsehood and deceit. 
 
 This command naturally follows the preceding, for to make false 
 statements concerning another is to steal away his character and 
 render all men distrustful of him. Furthermore, deceit and false- 
 hood, if universal, would render society, and therefore civilization, 
 an impossibility, for the very existence of a society depends upon 
 the mutual faith and trust reposed in the individual members 
 thereof. 
 
 10. " Thou shalt not covet [or envy] anything which is thy neigh- 
 bour's." 
 
 Of all the moral laws this is the least observed, and most diffi- 
 cult to observe, for it pre-supposes the highest possible develop- 
 ment of the moral character. No living man can flatter himself 
 that he has attained to this high elevation. A man of unblemished 
 rectitude of action, who would scorn to commit a base deed, will 
 still look with envy upon the possessions of another. This high 
 command, which carries with it the injunction "to love thy neigh- 
 bour as thyself," forms a fitting climax to a moral code which, if 
 followed, must inevitably lead to the highest conceivable plane of 
 development. It is the cap-stone of the finished pyramid, to which 
 it is impossible to add, and from which nothing can be taken. 
 The commandment which forms its base and that which completes 
 it were united by the Great Teacher into one Grand Command- 
 ment to express the spirit of the whole : "Love the Lord thy God 
 with all thy heart and with all thy soul, and thy neighbour as thy- 
 self." 
 
 The great monument of Cheops rises not more conspicuously 
 above the sands of the Egyptian desert than this great moral pyra- 
 mid above the wastes of human life. 
 
 Such is the code of Ethics which greets us at the very dawn of 
 history. Five hundred years before the Vedas of the Hindoos 
 were written, nine hundred years before the days of Confucius, 
 Buddha, and Zoroaster, and eleven hundred years before Socrates 
 and Plato, we find Moses delivering to his people a moral code 
 which still marks the limits of our aspirations, aud to which nearly 
 thirty-five hundred years of development have not been able to 
 add one jot or tittle ! 
 
Resume of the Four Stages of Social Development. 227 
 
 Whence came these laws which have served as a fountain for 
 all the law-givers who have entered the world ? Can it be possible 
 that the human race, at a time when the great mass of the people 
 were still steeped in the extreme of barbarism, could have evolved 
 a moral code which defies the highest civilization of the nineteenth 
 century to improve upon? Did the truths of morality belong to 
 that class of facts which depends solely upon the penetrating power 
 of the mind to arrive at, we can understand how a great genius 
 might be able to make great discoveries therein. The methods of 
 reaching geometrical truth are the same now as in the days of 
 Pythagoras or Euclid. But the truths of Morality belong to the 
 teachings of experience, and cannot be attained to by any process of 
 pure thought. Utility is the test to which all advance in morality 
 and government must be subjected. 
 
 The fable relates that Minerva sprang from the head of Jupiter 
 fully armed, so this law comes down to us from the womb of time 
 perfect and complete. Verily, the Sociologist who framed this 
 code for the conduct of human life exhausted the science, and has 
 left nothing for comers-after to do but to follow meekly in his foot- 
 steps. 
 
 Section VI. 
 
 Resume of the Four Stages of Social Development. 
 
 The chief features which characterized the various stages through 
 which the race passed in its upward course of Development may 
 thus be briefly summarized : 
 I. Vegetarian Stage. 
 
 During this period the diet of early man was exclusively 
 vegetable, consisting of the various fruits and tender roots 
 which are the spontaneous products of a warm country. He 
 was naked, for the climate would not suggest the need of cloth- 
 ing; he was shelterless, except the slight protection which the 
 plaited boughs of trees afforded ; he was fireless, for as yet 
 fire was not required, either to supply warmth or prepare food. 
 The conjugal relations were uncertain and temporary, and 
 probably endured for but a short time, a new division taking 
 place among the males at certain intervals. The offspring 
 would fall to the care of tfye female parent, as among brutes, 
 
2&8 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 until the children could shift for themselves. Language was 
 rudimentary, and religious sentiment was just beginning to 
 assert itself. As yet he had no arts of even the humblest de- 
 scription ; and his weapons consisted of rude stones and clubs 
 with no attempt at artificial improvement 
 II. Hunting Stage. 
 
 This was ushered in when the supply of vegetable food was 
 no longer able to meet the demands of an increasing popula- 
 tion. The pangs of hunger would lead him to imitate the 
 carnivorous brutes, and man became a flesh-eater. 
 
 This method of acquiring food would lead to the improve- 
 ment of his weapons ; and stone implements and better fash- 
 ioned clubs, together with the lance and bow and arrow, would 
 be invented. In the pursuit of roving game nomadic habits 
 would be necessitated to a much greater degree than formerly, 
 and he would thus be led beyond the warm country of his 
 birth into colder regions, where his naked body would be ex- 
 posed to the blasts of a less friendly clime. He would thus 
 learn to throw around him the skins of the beasts he had 
 slain for food. For shelter he would seek the protection of 
 natural caverns until his lowly mind taught him to build 
 rude huts of stone or timber over which skins might be 
 thrown. Some great conflagration, caused by lightning, (Pro- 
 methean fire,) or the vicinity of an active volcano, would draw 
 his attention to the qualities of fire, and he would soon learn 
 to appreciate its benefits when overcome by cold. From the 
 use of fire for the purpose of warmth to its use in preparing 
 animal food is but a short step. The great blessings to be de- 
 rived from fire would incite him to discover some method of 
 artificially producing it. 
 
 The conjugal and parental relations became more enduring, 
 and families began to form, which, in time, aggregated into 
 tribes with elective chiefs. Language and religion became more 
 highly developed, and ancestral or ghost worship, with personi- 
 fication of natural objects and forces, became established. 
 
 Periods when there was a dearth of game would teach him 
 the expediency of domesticating the tamer animals for pur- 
 poses of food. When this habit was well established the 
 third or Shepherd Stage was inaugurated. 
 
Bis time of the Four Stages of Social Development. 2»29 
 
 III. Shepherd Stage. 
 
 Man now no longer depended upon the uncertainties of a 
 hunter's life, and the possession of numerous herds of sheep 
 and cattle furnished him with milk and flesh in abundance. 
 His only care was to find proper pasturage for his herds, and 
 this naturally led him to the fertile plains and well-watered 
 valleys. 
 
 The rude arts which necessity taught him in the Hunting 
 Stage of his career were brought to a higher state of devel- 
 opment The leisure afforded also gave opportunity for the 
 reflective faculties to grow, and the savage ferocity, which his 
 hunter's life did so much to encourage, became mitigated by 
 more refined and comfortable surroundings, and governmental 
 and religious institutions became better established. The 
 prolonged stay in one spot would encourage experiments in 
 planting, and this would gradually initiate the Agricultural 
 Stage of development. 
 
 IV. Agricultural Stage. 
 
 The spontaneous fecundity of his great mother had supplied 
 the infant man with all his wants, but, as he became stronger 
 and more able to care for himself, she cast him off, and the 
 discipline to which he was subjected in his battle for life, by 
 calling into exercise all his latent powers, set on foot that ca- 
 reer of artificial development which shall not cease until he 
 has fulfilled the end for which he was created. Having been 
 trained in the school of hardship and necessity, he once more 
 returns to his parent to seek the aid which she had before 
 wisely withheld ; but her gifts are no longer free, and she de- 
 mands payment in patient toil and industry. 
 
 The progress of man in this the latest stage of his life has 
 been, comparatively speaking, rapid, and the further he ad- 
 vances the more rapid does his progress become. One after 
 another the arts and sciences developed, and, reacting upon 
 another, carried the whole to higher elevations ; and the same 
 is true of government and all things else. The process of 
 nation-making was indeed a fiery furnace, but it welded to- 
 gether the fragments of humanity, and prepared the world 
 for higher civilization. 
 
230 Evolution versxis Involution. 
 
 Chapter X. 
 
 Design in the Universe — Personality of the Uncaused Being; — Further 
 
 Criticisms. 
 
 This also we humbly beg, that human things may not prejudice such as are 
 Divine, neither that from the unlocking of the gates of Sense, and the kindling 
 of a greater natural light, anything of incredulity or intellectual night may 
 arise in our minds toward Divine mysteries. — Bacon. 
 
 The existence in the external world of "Design," or "Purpose," 
 or " Preestablished Harmony," or by whatsoever name we choose 
 to designate the power of predetermining results by the adaptation 
 of means to the accomplishment of ends, has always been a favor- 
 ite point of attack for that school which affects to interpret all 
 things in terms of Matter, Motion, and Force. 
 
 We will now endeavor to show that, from their own stand-point, 
 the advocates of this school are guilty of inconsistency ; that their 
 arguments rest upon the most fallacious grounds, or, rather, that 
 they are absolutely without any foundation whatsoever. 
 
 They assert that man is nothing more than a product of those 
 atoms and forces which we see playing around us in nature ; and 
 that in the building up of a crystal, in the formation of a plant or 
 an animal, in the production of the human mind, we behold only 
 the varying results of the operation of the same forces and atoms. 
 
 Accepting their position, for the time being, we will now pro- 
 ceed to prove how absolutely inconsistent they are in denying the 
 existence of a Designing Power external to man. If Man be a 
 natural product, he belongs to nature as much as the crystal which 
 helps to form the rock, or the moss that covers it ; and the attri- 
 butes which he exhibits, mental or otherwise, are as much natural 
 phenomena as the attributes of the crystal or the attributes of the 
 plant. Self-consciousness, language, reason, the results of his 
 handiwork, (art,) and all things else, are nothing more than the 
 products of natural forces. 
 
 In the aggregation of atoms called Man, natural forces have, 
 
Design in the Universe. 231 
 
 according to them, become conscious of themselves — i. e., have at- 
 tained to a knowledge of their own existence. Now, the aggre- 
 gate of natural forces, called Reason, has invented a certain word, 
 " Design," to designate certain methods of its action. This word 
 is meant to convey the notion of a pre-conceived end to be accom- 
 plished, and in the adaptation of the means to attain this end, we 
 are to recognize the Designing forces in operation. The self-con- 
 scious forces acting in man, not being able to distinguish the same 
 element of pre-ordination or Design in the actions of other natural 
 forces, a new word was invented, called chance, which is intended 
 to convey the notion that the End attained was not foreseen or 
 pre-determined by them. Thus, whilst the natural forces consti- 
 tuting human reason apply the title of Design to their own ac- 
 tions in the construction of a house, they withhold that title from 
 the results of the natural forces which are engaged in the building 
 up of the body, a mass of rock, or a crystal. But by what war- 
 rant have one set of natural forces to arrogate to themselves the 
 exclusive power of pre-determining or foreseeing results, and to 
 deny the same power to other natural forces ? 
 
 What right has one set of the forces of nature, because it is 
 conscious of its doings, to assert that other aggregates of the same 
 natural forces are unconscious and designless in theirs ? 
 
 Obviously, this assumed superiority is without foundation in abso- 
 lute knowledge, and the natural forces constituting a crystal, or a 
 plant, might retaliate with an equal show of reason. A closer in- 
 vestigation of nature discloses the fact that even the most trivial 
 phenomena occur, not " hap-hazard" as the word Chance was in- 
 tended to indicate, but that the same adaptation of means to Ends 
 exist outside of human volition as in human volition. The word 
 "Chance," has, therefore, been discarded from the vocabulary of 
 philosophy, and the word law has taken its place. 
 
 Wherever there is a special adaptation of means for the accom- 
 plishment of an End in human affairs, we call it Design; wherever 
 we behold the same occurring external to human volition, we call 
 it Law, thereby implying that there is some vital distinction be- 
 tween the two. Bi:t the distinction exists (to those who deny, or 
 w r ho refuse to accept, the existence of a Creator) only in the name; 
 and those who look upon natural forces as the origin of all things, 
 must regard Design in Man as precisely the same as Law acting 
 
232 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 external to Man. Both are the expressions of natural forces, and 
 both act in exactly the same way by adapting means to Ends. 
 But, say they, one is conscious of itself, the other not. How do 
 they know that the plant is not conscious of its own existence ? 
 They cannot prove it, and to be consistent, they ought to acknowl- 
 edge that such is the case, for, being similar in two very important 
 features, in their genesis and mode of action, the probability of 
 their resemblance in the third is that much greater. 
 
 Should it be held that the power of adapting means to ends, 
 which we see exhibited by a plant in taking up and assimilating 
 its food, or seizing on to something for support, does not reside in 
 the plant itself, but in Something outside of it, (which would be 
 helping to overthrow their own position,) then, I reply, that that 
 something constitutes a part of the essential nature of the plant, 
 and bears the same relation to it that the Conscious I does to the 
 nerves, muscles, and bones of my body. In other words, the ag- 
 gregation of atoms constituting the plant, with the laws governing 
 it, must be regarded as a unified whole in the same measure as the 
 atoms composing my body and the laws governing them constitute 
 the unity called I. 
 
 These thinkers of all men should be the last to ascribe to them- 
 selves that which they deny to the rest of nature, for by so doing 
 they at once confess that there is something in themselves which is 
 not to be found in the rest of nature. And then the question comes 
 with startling force, Whence came it? 
 
 In spite of all their fundamental tenets, they constantly reason 
 and act as if they were outside of nature instead of being a part 
 and parcel of her, possessing what she has, but nothing which she 
 has not. 
 
 Mr. Spencer and his theories are, according to his own showing, 
 as much natural phenomena as thunder and lightning, and, if he 
 attribute Design to his productions, so also must he to the thunder- 
 bolt which rives the oak. If he deny designing power to external 
 nature, then must he deny it to himself also ! From this conclu- 
 sion there is no escape. 
 
 Disbelief, then, in the existence of a Supreme Being distinct 
 from the Universe will compel us to recognize conscious existence 
 and designing power in every atom and aggregation of atoms 
 
Design in the Universe. 233 
 
 throughout nature,* in the crystal as well as in the plant, in the 
 animal as well as in the highest human being — all are on an equal 
 footing. It compels us to. look back upon au unutterable past 
 and to look forward into an unutterable future, in which an innu- 
 merable multitude of self-conscious beings have been and will be 
 acting and reacting upon one another, each one imagining that it 
 alone possesses self-consciousness. 
 
 By the recognition of One Supreme, Uncaused Being, who 
 stands in relation to the Universe as Creator, all these difficulties 
 disappear. We may now look upon ourselves as peculiarly set 
 apart and elevated above the surrounding world, and endowed 
 with Designing powers for a special end. In other words, we can 
 now, with some show of reason, believe that what we call Design 
 in ourselves is very different from what we call Law in external 
 nature. We may now look upon these Laws as the unconscious 
 agents of a Creating or Causative Power, and we need no longer 
 regard them as consciously adapting means to ends, which power 
 thus becomes the distinguishing feature of humanity. With this 
 self-conscious adaptation of means to ends has been conferred 
 Freedom, and thus we attain to another distinction between De- 
 sign and Law : a Designing Power may, Law must, act 
 
 Oar moral nature now has room to expand, and feelings of gen- 
 uine worship will take the place of the previous dead fatalism 
 which withers up the soul and paralyzes life. But we are not 
 
 * " Has matter innate motion ? Then each atom, 
 Asserting its indisputable right 
 To dance, would form an universe of dust. 
 Has matter none ? Then, whence these glorious forms 
 And boundless flights, from shapeless, and reposed? 
 Has matter more than motion? Has it thought, 
 Judgment, and genius? Is it deeply learn'd 
 In mathematics ? Has it framed such laws, 
 Which, but to guess, a Newton made immortal ? 
 If so, how each sage atom laughs at me, 
 Who think a clod inferior to a man! 
 If art, to form; and counsel, to conduct; 
 And that with greater far, than human skill, 
 Resides not in each block ; — a Godhead reigns, — 
 Grant, then, invisible, eternal, mind; 
 That granted, all is solved." 
 
 — Young — " Night Thoughts." 
 
234 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 to look with contempt upon the rest of nature, for the grand frame- 
 work of the Material Universe is also the expression of the Will 
 of the Great First Cause, upon whom our own existence depends; 
 only He has taught us, in the self-consciousness with which we have 
 been endowed, that we are to regard ourselves as far higher in the 
 scale of being than it, and that in our contemplation of Him we are 
 to draw our Symbols, not from the mighty suns which fill immensity? 
 each revolving in its appointed path, nor yet from those space- 
 annihilating forces which bind into an harmonious whole the 
 uttermost limits of the Material Universe. 
 
 Where, then, shall we seek for symbols? Can it be satisfac- 
 torily determined that our conception of what we call Law in ex- 
 ternal nature is inferior to our conception of what we call Design in 
 ourselves ? 
 
 The study of nature demonstrates that its phenomena are sus- 
 pended one from another, forming an endless chain (as far as we 
 can practically determine) of Cause and Effect, and the Cause of a 
 thing becomes a Law unto that thing. Our idea of Law is, then, 
 that of a Causative Power working through Necessity. As natural 
 causes present us with an endless chain, it is obvious that, Exper- 
 imentally, we can never arrive at the notion of an Uncaused Cause 
 or a Spontaneous Power, for this would pre-suppose that we had 
 circumscribed the Universe. It is plain, therefore, that from ex- 
 ternal nature we can form no idea of a Spontaneous agent or of a 
 Causative power working otherwise than through Necessity. But, 
 looking in upon ourselves, the conscious power of volition to act 
 or not to act, to come or to go, engenders within us a notion of 
 Spontaneity which external nature cannot supply. (With the 
 savage and superstitious, Spontaneity is, indeed, ascribed to the 
 powers of nature, but the notion is but a reflex of what they are 
 conscious of in themselves.) Thus, by the recognition of our own 
 conscious freedom of action we arrive at an apprehension of the 
 possible existence of an Uncaused Causative Power. Now, as an 
 uncaused thing must be greater than that which is caused, and as 
 our notion of Law is of something that is Caused or necessitated 
 by something else, it is obvious that the word Design, which car- 
 ries with it the idea of Spontaneity or freedom to act or not to act, 
 should be applied to the methods of the Uncaused Cause of things 
 in preference to any other word which our vocabulary affords. In 
 
Personality of the Deity. 235 
 
 a word, our conception of Design is higher than our conception of 
 Law in the same measure that Freedom is higher than Compul- 
 sion. 
 
 Mr. Spencer, and those who think with him, in denying to the 
 First Cause of things Designing power and Spontaneity of action 
 are guilty of the most extraordinary inconsistency, for, having 
 postulated an Uncaused First Cause, they still fetter it by the iron 
 bonds of Necessity ; this Necessity being certain notions of Law 
 which they have derived from the study of the phenomena of na- 
 ture. 
 
 But it is our bounden duty to think of the First Cause in the 
 highest terms in our power, and if we recognize in the notion of 
 Spontaneity or Freedom something higher than that conveyed by 
 the word Law or Necessity, then we have no choice left but to 
 regard the First Cause of the Universe as a Spontaneous or De- 
 signing Power. 
 
 This same school of thought seeks to destroy the Personality of 
 the Uncaused Cause of things, and under the specious guise of 
 humility affirms that we cannot justly speak of Him as a Person 
 without detraction. 
 
 The great error underlying this position is exposed when our 
 notion of Personality is clearly analyzed, and we will then come 
 to understand that the only perfect Personality is the Uncaused 
 Being and that all other Personalities are but approximations to 
 this Perfect one. 
 
 The Personality or Individuality of a thing is measured by the 
 characteristics or qualities which are peculiar to itself and by its In- 
 dependence. The more unique its attributes and complete its In- 
 dependence the greater does its Personality become. To render 
 this clear to the mind, we have but to turn to external nature and 
 trace the gradual growth of Personality from the amorphous Inor- 
 ganic to the highest form of the Organic, Man, in whom Person- 
 ality reaches its fullest expression among terrestrial things. 
 
 A heap of sand possesses little or no individuality as compared 
 with a crystal, with its geometrical figure and planes of cleavage. 
 A lump of charcoal has a less degree of individuality than the 
 gem which sparkles on the arm of beauty. There is but little 
 distinction among the leaves of the same tree or among the blades 
 of the same species of grass. In the lower walks of creation indi- 
 
236 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 viduality only exists to a noticeable degree among species, and 
 among individuals of the same species but few distinctions can be 
 traced. Continuing up the scale of being, we will find that the 
 higher we ascend the greater becomes those peculiarities which 
 distinguish individuals of the same species one from the other, and 
 the highest Individuality or Personality is reached in Man. Again, 
 there are fewer distinguishing traits among savages than among 
 civilized men, and among civilized men Personality reaches its 
 maximum with those individuals who are marked off as men of 
 genius. Thus, the higher we mount in the scale of being the 
 greater does Personality become as measured by peculiarities of 
 attributes. Again, if we analyze our notions of Personality as 
 measured by Independence or Freedom, the same truth impresses 
 itself upon us. In the inorganic and vegetable kingdoms volition 
 or personal independence of action is absolutely nil ; and so faintly 
 is it manifested in the lower walks of the animal kingdom that we 
 would be scarcely justified in ascribing personal volition to the 
 animal creation until we had reached quite a height on the tree of 
 life. The higher we climb the more does personal volition enter 
 as a factor into the life of the animal, rendering it more and more 
 capable of extending the limits of its environment. In Man this 
 personal volition reaches its maximum, and in him environment 
 has also reached its maximum, for he covers the face of the hab- 
 itable globe. It is a well-known law of physics that " action and 
 reaction are equal and opposite" so in the organic world improve- 
 ment of environment insures improvement of the environed, and 
 this improvement of the environed reacts upon the environment, 
 and so the two develop together. With the growth of human In- 
 telligence freedom of action becomes more and more marked. The 
 lowest savages, in their manner of life and in the degree of their 
 dependence upon natural forces, remind us of the higher brutes. 
 As civilization develops, this enslavement to nature becomes less 
 and less, and volition, in modifying environment, becomes more 
 and more conspicuous. This extended freedom is rendered still 
 more apparent when we remember that he makes use of these 
 same natural forces to which he was once in bondage to neutralize 
 their effects upon himself, thus converting the devastating powers 
 of nature into beneficent allies to further his advancement. He 
 has literally captured the lightning, and this, which is of all the 
 
Personality of the Deity. 237 
 
 agents of nature the, most terrifying to the savage mind, now be- 
 comes his faithful messenger, carrying his behests to the utter- 
 most ends of the earth. 
 
 " For lo I the fall of ocean's wall 
 Space mocked and time outrun ; 
 And round the world the thought of all 
 Is as the thought of one ! " 
 
 Climate is modified by the artificial adaptation of natural agents; 
 and the pestilential marsh, carrying on its breath the seeds of death, 
 is reclaimed and made to contribute to man's material well-being. 
 In whatsoever direction we turn our eye we behold the fulfillment 
 of the command : " Be fruithful, and multiply, and replenish the 
 Earth, and subdue it." 
 
 This growing freedom from natural bonds, so conspicuous in his 
 material progress, is still more conspicuous in his increasing moral 
 freedom, or freedom from the enslavement of personal appetites. 
 Man, in the mass, is becoming more and more an Intellectual Being, 
 and less and less dependent upon the lower elements of his nature 
 for happiness and pleasure. The power of discriminating between 
 Right and Wrong, according to some accepted standard, (an attri- 
 bute peculiar to Man,) initiated the first step in Moral freedom. 
 When, in the progress of his upward growth, man had reached 
 that point in his development which enabled him to receive higher 
 truths, then the shifting and imperfect standards were replaced by 
 a revealed perfect standard, and his emancipation from personal ap- 
 petites became still greater. In the fullness of time this Perfect 
 standard received its full interpretation and fulfillment in the Per- 
 son of the Perfect Man, Jesus Christ ; and now the last manacles 
 which bound man to his brute nature were severed forever, and the 
 way was opened up for the attainment of still higher freedom. 
 In the person of Christ we recognize the fullest Personality which 
 has ever appeared on the theater of the world, and in Him we 
 behold the most complete Freedom and the most extended en- 
 vironment. The whole range of human sympathy He made His 
 own, and He showed how completely man's lower wants can be 
 held in subjection by his higher. Here, then, we have the most 
 exalted type of Personality which the human mind has ever been 
 called upon to contemplate ; and in Him we see fulfilled to a higher 
 degree than ever before the requirements of the definition of Per- 
 
238 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 sonality which has been given. Thus by gradual steps do we rise 
 to the apprehension of the Great truth that Perfect Personality 
 can alone reside in the Uncaused Being, for He alone possesses 
 absolute Independence, and attributes which no created being 
 can possess. 
 
 It will be seen that the conclusion here reached in proof of the 
 Personality of the Deity supports and is supported by the argu- 
 ment for Design. The key-note of both is Absolute Freedom un- 
 fettered by the bonds of Necessity, notions of which are always 
 generated in the mind by the Contemplation of LAW in Nature. 
 
 It is obvious, then, that in formulating our ideas of the Uncaused 
 Being, our Symbols must be taken from our highest conceptions. 
 Is what we call Intelligence higher that what we call Non-Intelli- 
 gence ? 
 Is what we call Personality higher that what we call Impersonality ? 
 (*. e.,is the thing called man higher than the individual atoms 
 which enter into his make-up ?) 
 Is what we call Design or Purpose higher than Law or Necessity, 
 which cannot foresee, nor is conscious of the results of its 
 own action ? 
 Is the consciousness of Self-existence higher than the Unconscious- 
 ness of Self-existence ? 
 
 In determining the answers to these questions, it is impossible 
 for any mind that is capable of appreciating the just relations of 
 things to fall into error. 
 
 Now, as it is our bounden duty to reverently contemplate the 
 ultimate cause of things to whom we owe existence, and as it is 
 impossible, in the very nature of things, for the mind to contem- 
 plate that of which it forms no conception, it becomes absolutely 
 necessary for us to attempt to form some conception, however im- 
 perfect, in order that such contemplation may be possible. 
 
 Having satisfied ourselves that we are to think of Him, not as 
 a negative quantity or blank to be represented by Zero, but as a 
 positive quantity which numbers are powerless to express — not as 
 the shadow, but as the very light itself — our course becomes plain. 
 Taking the highest attributes of which we can form any concep- 
 tion, and prefixing Infinity to each, we thus arrive at the appre- 
 hension (not comprehension) of an Infinite, Personal, Intelligent, 
 Non-Material Being, the Creator and Sustainer of all things. 
 
Criticisms. 239 
 
 The recognition of the true relations of things is a definition of 
 Sanity, and failure of the mind in this regard, when carried to 
 certain lengths, is called insanity. Where the practical affairs of 
 life are concerned it becomes of the utmost importance to material 
 well-being that a just recognition of the true relations of things 
 should exist in the mind of every responsible member of sbciety. 
 The man who insists on mistaking another's property for his own, 
 and who, on every possible occasion, violates the established rules 
 of decency and order, will be promptly cared for, either as a crim- 
 inal or as a " non compos mentis. 1 ' But in matters of opinion 
 only, wider latitude is given, and a man may indulge in the most 
 extravagant fancies under the name of. philosophy without en- 
 dangering his persoual liberty or being considered a proper sub- 
 ject for medical treatment. Many a man has been eulogized as a 
 profound thinker and philosopher, who, had he exhibited the same 
 degree of erratic judgment in the practical affairs of life, would 
 have been relieved of all responsibility. Mill charged Comte with 
 being insane. But, all the while, Mill himself was floundering in 
 the mazes of his own inconsistencies, and failed to recognize the 
 fact that Comte was simply carrying his mad system to its legiti- 
 mate ultimatum. 
 
 The inconsistencies of Mr. Spencer are absolutely startling ! 
 He calls his system one of Evolution, yet by his own confession 
 (see pass, from F. P. already quoted) it is one of Involution. He 
 uses the word Dissolution as antithetical to Involution, to describe 
 the contrary process which has preceded and which must follow 
 Involution. These two alternating states compose the sum total 
 of existence. 
 
 He often speaks of a First Cause, yet he identities the material 
 Universe and everything connected with it as one with this first 
 cause. His first cause thus ceases to be a cause at all, for he denies 
 that the Universe ever had a beginning. The conditions of Invo- 
 lution and Dissolution are alternately cause and effect for one an- 
 other, and the cycle from the beginning of a period of Involution 
 to the completion of a period of Dissolution constitutes a rythmi- 
 cal pulsation of the Universe. As such a- rythm comprises the 
 totality of existence, it can have no Cause, unless it be said to cause 
 itself, which is an absurdity. Such a thing as First Cause is, there- 
 fore, wholly at variance with Mr. Spencer's system. 
 
240 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 He says (First Principles, p. 551,) : "For if, as we saw reason to 
 think, there is an alternation of Evolution [Involution] and Dis- 
 solution in the totality of things — if, as we are obliged to infer 
 from the Persistence of Force, the arrival at either limit of this 
 vast rythm brings about the conditions under which a counter- 
 movement commences — if we are hence compelled to entertain the 
 conception of Involutions [his Evolutions] that have filled an im- 
 measurable past, and Involutions that will fill an immeasurable 
 future, we can no longer contemplate the visible creation as hav- 
 ing a definite beginning or end, or as being isolated. [By which he 
 means to say that it has not been created, that is, Uncaused.^ It 
 becomes unified with all existence before and after." 
 
 His system being Pantheistic, (which is but another name for 
 Atheism,) either the Universe as a whole must be worshipped, or 
 the highest thing known must be selected to represent the whole, 
 or the religious sentiment must go entirely by default. Comte 
 was also a Pantheist, but looking upon Man as the most exalted 
 known part of his Universe God, he very consistently selected hu- 
 man nature as an object of worship. Whilst no healthy mind can 
 accept such nonsense, still he was but carrying out his absurd sys- 
 tem to its legitimate conclusion. And now those who had followed 
 him in his annihilation of a Creator refused to take the final step 
 with their more courageous and consistent leader, but, doubling 
 upon their track, were left without any object of worship whatso- 
 ever. 
 
 Mr. Spencer, in reference to our mental make-up, says (P. Psy- 
 chology, Vol. 1, p. 504,) : " The aggregate of feelings and ideas 
 constituting the Mental I, have not in themselves the principle of 
 cohesion holding them together as a whole ; but the I which con- 
 tinuously survives as the subject of these changing states is that 
 Portion of the Unknowable Power which is statically conditioned 
 in special nervous structures pervaded by a dynamically condi- 
 tioned portion of the Unknowable Power called Energy." 
 
 Again, on p. 217, First Principles, he says : " Various classes of 
 facts thus unite to prove that the law of metamorphosis, which 
 holds among the physical forces, holds equally between them and 
 the mental forces. Those modes of the Unknowable which we call 
 motion, heat, light, chemical affinity, &c, are alike transformable 
 into each other, and into those modes of the Unknowable which 
 
Criticisms. 245 
 
 We may conclude this chapter by urging the necessity of ac- 
 cepting the following positions: 
 
 If there be a Supreme, Uncaused Being, who stands in relation 
 to the Universe as a Cause or Creator, it becomes our bounden 
 duty to contemplate this Being with reverential awe and render 
 unto Him true worship. But, in order to contemplate, some at- 
 tempt must be made to embody a conception. In forming this 
 conception, we must first determine which are our highest concep- 
 tions. Having done this, we clothe this Being with these attri- 
 butes, but so qualified as to take them beyond the sphere of all 
 limitations. 
 
 We are, therefore, to think of this Being as Infinite, not as 
 Finite. 
 
 We must think of Him as Intelligent and Spiritual, (i. e., non- 
 material,) not as Unintelligent and Material. 
 
 We must think of Him as Personal, not as Impersonal. 
 
 We must think of Him as Conscious of His own acts, not as 
 Unconscious. 
 
 We must think of Him as a Free and Spontaneous Causative 
 Power, not as an inexorable Necessity (our notions of which have 
 been derived from the action of Law in nature) which must act, 
 and which is not conscious of the results of its own actions. 
 
 But having done all this, having stretched our limited faculties 
 to their highest bent, we may still recognize that we have fallen 
 infinitely short of the Great Eeality. But He who laid the foun- 
 dations of the Universe and prescribed the limits thereof will not 
 judge His creatures for limitations which He Himself has fixed. 
 
246 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Chapter XI 
 
 Good and Evil. 
 
 "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law ; for sin is the trans- 
 gression of the laiv." — St. John. 
 
 "The sting of deathis Sin; and the Strength of Sin is the Law." — St. Paul. 
 
 Two kinds of Good and Evil are recognized among men — 
 Physical Good and Physical Evil, Moral Good and Moral Evil. 
 Though often confounded in thought and speech, they are as 
 widely sundered as the poles and have no affinity one with the 
 other. 
 
 The definition of Physical Good is, that which is beneficial to the 
 material well-being of the individual. Physical Evil is anything 
 which militates against this. Famine, Pestilence, Tempest, Suffer- 
 ing and Death are all denominated Physical Evils. Moral Good 
 and Moral Evil depend for their existence upon the consciousness 
 of Eight and Wrong, as measured by some recognized and ac- 
 cepted standard of conduct. Moral Good consists in obedience to 
 this standard, (whatever its nature,) while willful violation of it 
 constitutes Moral Evil or Sin. 
 
 The essential nature of Physical Good and Evil lies in the Act 
 itself, whilst the essential nature of Moral Good and Evil lies in 
 Motive. An act may be physically good, but morally evil. 
 
 St. Paul tells us, "the strength of Sin is the Law," thereby re- 
 vealing its true nature and reiterating a similar statement of IV 
 Romans, "for where no Law is, there is no transgression." St. 
 John tells us explicitly (see quotation head of chapter) "that Sin 
 is the transgression of the Law." 
 
 The possibility of Sin rests upon personal Freedom, and pre- 
 supposes rebellion against recognized authority. One who is bound 
 by necessity to act in a certain way can be guilty of no Sin, for, 
 when he comes under the law of compulsion, he ceases to be per- 
 sonally responsible, and becomes a mere machine executing the 
 will of another. 
 
Good and Evil. 247 
 
 Moral Evil or Sin is oftentimes spoken of as if it were a Prin- 
 ciple or an Entity in the Universe, but it is obviously nothing 
 more than a condition — a condition of rebellion on the part of a 
 Free Agent. Those who deny Man's Freedom must also deny 
 the possibility of Moral Evil or Sin. 
 
 What are known as Physical Evils occur in the established 
 order of nature, and we are not to regard them as " things which 
 ought not to be" for this would be calling in question the wise or- 
 dinance of the Universe and be recognizing a radical vice in the 
 constitution of things. We cannot understand why pain and 
 death should enter into the plan of the Universe, but their exist- 
 ence carries ivith it the warrant of their justification. The Atheist, 
 as well as the believer in a Beneficent Creator, must alike regard 
 the Material Universe as the best that is possible. Inexorable 
 logic compels the Atheist so to regard it, and firm reliance upon 
 Infinite Wisdom leads the Theist to believe it* 
 
 Were we to define Evil as something which ought not to be, it is 
 obvious that what we see taking place in external nature, and 
 which are called evils, could not be so regarded. 
 
 Whilst the healthy mind, as it surveys the broad bosom of ter- 
 restrial creation, may see much that it cannot understand, yet im- 
 plicit confidence in the First Cause of things will enable it to re- 
 cognize the universal harmony that runs through the whole. " The 
 sting of death is Sin," says St. Paul, thereby teaching us that death 
 only becomes discord when united with Moral Evil or Sin. But 
 if Moral Evil or Sin be a discordant note in the universal harmony, 
 how did it come into existence? And why is it permitted to 
 exist ? The answers to these questions are to be found in the re- 
 cognition of Man's Freedom of Will. Sin being nothing more 
 than a condition of rebellion, it is obvious that it could not be 
 prevented from coming into existence, nor, once in being, could it 
 
 * Pessimism is one form of Insanity, for it is positive evidence that the in- 
 dividual has lost all just appreciation of the true relations of things, and his 
 brain must, therefore, be in an unhealthy state. A change of scene and so- 
 ciety are the best remedies for this mental condition. The writer, as a physi- 
 cian of considerable experience, would urgently recommend this course to all 
 so afflicted — medicaments are of secondary importance, though often valuable 
 adjuncts to the main treatment. Disorders of the digestive apparatus are not 
 infrequent causes of this mental state. 
 
248 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 be banished by the mandate of Omnipotence without Man's Free- 
 dom being sacrificed with it ! ! The possibility of rebellion cannot 
 be separated from our conception of a Free agent, and the moment 
 this possibility is done away with by Creative Power, that moment 
 Freedom is destroyed, and the creature is reduced from a moral and 
 responsible being to an irresponsible automaton. Thus THE POSSI- 
 BILITY of sin must always remain so long as there is Freedom 
 of action — i. e., so long as there is a responsible creature in the 
 Universe. 
 
 How a created thing could be endowed with Freedom is, in- 
 deed, a mystery which reason is powerless to solve, but its truth 
 rests upon even higher authority than what we call the reasoning- 
 faculty ; the consciousness of personal freedom is an intuitive 
 Principlewhicli has its seat in the breast of every rational creature, 
 and the Presence of this Principle makes him ivhat he is ! There 
 are axiomatic truths in Geometry beyond which reason cannot 
 penetrate; so in moral science there are certain eternal Principles 
 which must be accepted, for they are inseparable from conscious- 
 ness, and we cannot so much as imagine ourselves existing without 
 them. Conscious Freedom is the great axiomatic truth upon which 
 our whole moral being rests, and the denial of it is the denial of 
 the possibility of Morality ! 
 
 And here, indeed, reason, which was before powerless, can at 
 least lend us a helping hand by pointing out the necessity for Man's 
 Freedom. Metaphysical Sophistry may so warp the mind as to in- 
 duce it to question this great truth. From this unhealthy state it 
 ma}* find relief by remembering that without freedom morality 
 could not exist. 
 
 Accepting the great truth of Man's Free Agency, the existence 
 of Sin or Moral Evil is no longer a mystery — the recognition of the 
 one is a solution of the other. Destroy Freedom on the part of the 
 Creature, and Sin is destroyed. The allegory of the Garden, in 
 recognizing the Sameness of Sin and Disobedience, carries with it 
 a distinct enunciation of Man's Freedom ; for how can there be 
 disobedience lest freedom of action be granted ? 
 
 The prevalence in external nature of what are called evils, the 
 tempest, the pestilence, the earthquake, and the universal carnage 
 which we see taking place throughout the lower creation, where the 
 weaker are constantly made victims by the stronger, has always 
 
Criticisms. 241 
 
 we distinguish as sensation, emotion, thought ; these, in their turns, 
 being directly or indirectly re-transformable into the original 
 shapes." These passages carry with them an unmistakable recog- 
 nition that the Mental I is a mode of Being (not, mark you, merely 
 a manifestation) of his Unknowable or Ultimate Power. Now, if 
 Mr. Spencer acknowledges, which he does, that the Mental I is 
 the highest form of this Ultimate Power which he can apprehend, 
 there is no choice left him but to worship himself and others like 
 himself, or to worship nothing. From whatever point of view we 
 examine his system the most glaring inconsistencies stare us in 
 the face. 
 
 In his reply to Mr. Martineau's criticism, he is guilty of a de- 
 gree of affectation and unfairness which lays him open to the 
 charge of disingenuousness. He says : " Speaking for myself only, 
 I may say that, agreeing with Mr. Martineau in repudiating the 
 Materialistic interpretation as utterly futile, I differ from him sim- 
 ply in this : that while he says he has found another interpretation, 
 I confess that I cannot find any interpretation ; while he holds 
 that he can understand the Power which is manifested in things, I 
 feel obliged to admit, after many failures, that I cannot understand 
 it. So that, in the presence of the transcendant problem which 
 tli e Universe presents, Mr. Martineau regards the human intellect 
 as capable, and I as incapable." His assertion that he is not a 
 materialist goes for naught in face of the fact that he unifies what 
 he calls the Material Universe with his Ultimate Power ; all Ex- 
 istence being simply Modes of this Ultimate Power. Mr, Spen- 
 cer's denial of Materialism is merely a denial that he can under- 
 stand the ultimate nature of matter; but Mr. Spencer would be the 
 last person to deny that what we call matter has a real existence. 
 Now, the question of Materialism lies just here ; if I identify what 
 I call the Material Universe with the Ultimate Power, then my 
 conception of that Power becomes a Materialistic one, and I am a 
 Materialist. It will be seen that the ultimate nature of what we 
 call matter does not enter into the question at all. Matter is a 
 name which we give to that something which impresses us as occu- 
 pying space; and, if we believe that this Something and the Un- 
 caused Cause are one and the same, then we are to all intents and 
 purposes Materialists. That such is the nature of Mr. Spencer's 
 belief he cannot deny, for the foundation of his whole system 
 16 
 
242 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 rests upon this interpretation ; and, furthermore, he confesses as 
 much, as the reader may judge from passages quoted. 
 
 His attack on Mr. Martineau for giving a Spiritualistic interpre- 
 tation of the First Cause was most unjust; for the ascription of a 
 Spiritual nature to the Ultimate Power was not an affirmation that 
 Its ultimate nature was thereby determined, but merely a denial 
 that It is what we call Material. As clearly shown in the second 
 chapter of this work, when we define a thing as Spiritual in Na- 
 ture we merely affirm that it is not what we call Material. The 
 definition is. therefore, a negative one, and defines not what it is, but 
 what it is NOT. The Soul of Man is often referred to as a Spiritual 
 substance, but no one would ever think of interpreting this to 
 mean that the substance of the human soul was identical with the 
 Ultimate Nature of the Creator. After this unwarrantable inter- 
 pretation of Mr. Martineau's attitude, he goes on to say: "If there 
 is such a thing as the Pride of Science, it is obviously exceeded 
 by the Pride of Theology. I fail to perceive humility in the be- 
 lief that the human mind is able to comprehend that which is be- 
 hind appearances ; and I do not see how piety is especially exem- 
 plified in the assertion that the Universe contains no mode of 
 existence higher in nature than that which is present to us in con- 
 sciousness. On the contrary, I think it quite a defensible propo- 
 sition that humility is better shown by a confession of incompetence 
 to grasp in thought the cause of all things ; and that the religious 
 sentiment may find its highest sphere in the belief that the Ulti- 
 mate Power is no more representable in terms of human conscious- 
 ness than human consciousness is representable in terms of a plant's 
 functions." 
 
 Had Mr. Spencer never written anything but this — had he never 
 attempted the truly Herculean task of explaining all about this 
 wondrous Universe — how the present order of things had been 
 preceded by a period of Dissolution, which, in its turn, had been 
 preceded by a period of Involution, and so on to an infinite past; 
 and how the present period of Involution will be followed by a 
 period of Dissolution, and this by another period of Involution, 
 and so on to an Infinite future — I say, that if Mr. Spencer had 
 not undertaken to explain the workings of the Totality of things, 
 the above paragraph might influence us to believe that of all men 
 he was the most humble, and that his reverence for the Ultimate 
 
Criticisms. 243 
 
 Power was so great that he considered it desecration even to at- 
 tempt to contemplate it. But, in the face of his whole system — 
 in the face of his often reiterated statements that the Universe is 
 one and the same with the Ultimate Power, "and cannot be thought 
 of as isolated from it " — in face of the fact that, in attempting to 
 circumscribe the Totality of existence, he has been all the while at- 
 tempting to circumscribe this Ultimate Power — in the face of all this, 
 what are we to think of this paragraph? 
 
 Mr. Spencer, in his criticism upon Sir W. Hamilton and Mr. 
 Mansel, who maintained that it was our duty to think of the First 
 Cause as an Infinite Personality, says (First Principles, p. 108,) : 
 " That this is not the conclusion here adopted, needs hardly to be 
 said. If there be any meaning in the foregoing arguments, duty 
 requires us neither to affirm or deny personality." Which, being 
 interpreted, means that duty requires that we should not attempt 
 to contemplate the First Cause at all ! He then continues, on the 
 next page : " This, which to most will seem an essentially irreli- 
 gious position, is an essentially religious one — nay, is the religious 
 one, to which, as already shown, all others are but approximations." 
 Now, as Mr. Spencer has told us that we are not to think of the 
 Ultimate Power as Personal, nor yet as Impersonal, it is evident 
 that we are not to try to think of it all; and no sentiment becomes 
 the "true" religious sentiment* It is very obvious that what Mr. 
 Spencer calls the religious sentiment is merely a negation of all 
 sentiment ; and no effort to contemplate the author of our being 
 
 * The utter emptiness of Mr. Spencer's position with reference to this great 
 question is so well set forth by Mr. Harrison, himself a disciple of the erratic 
 school of Comte, that I can do no better than to quote from him : " How mere 
 a phrase must any religion be of which neither belief, nor worship, nor conduct 
 can be spoken ! Imagine a religion which can have no believers because, ex 
 hypotheosi, its adepts are forbidden to believe anything about it. Imagine a 
 religion which excludes the idea of worship because its sole dogma is the in- 
 finity of Nothingness. Lastly, imagine a religion which can have no relation 
 to conduct, for obviously the Unknowable can give us no intelligible help to 
 conduct, and, ex vi termini, can have no bearing on conduct. A religion which 
 could not make any one better, which could leave the human heart and human 
 society just as it found them, which left no foothold for devotion and none for 
 faith, which could have no creed, no doctrines, no temples, no priests, no 
 teachers, no rites, no morality, no beauty, no hope, no consolation ; which is 
 summed up in one dogma — the Unknowable is everywhere and Evolution is 
 its prophet. This is indeed to defecate religion to & pure transparency." 
 
f44 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 is the true religious attitude, compared with which all other are but 
 " approximations ! " We may call black white, and negative posi- 
 tive, but they remain the same in spite of the change of name! 
 
 On page 123, (First Principles,) occurs the following passage, re- 
 ferring to every man's right to express and act up to his opinions 
 under all circumstances, which, while very consistent with the 
 general tenor of his system, is still extremely inconsistent with the 
 quotation last cited : " He, like every other man, may properly 
 consider himself as one of the myriad agencies through whom 
 works the Unknown Cause ; and when the Unknown Cause pro- 
 duces in him a certain belief, he is thereby authorized to profess 
 and act out that belief." 
 
 In other words, every individual, being part and parcel of the 
 Unknown Cause, his thoughts and actions, ivhatever they may be, 
 are equally right with those of every other. Why, then, should 
 Mr. Spencer consider himself as holding u the true" religious sen- 
 timent, thereby implying that so many others hold a false one? 
 Why should he arrogate to himself such a high privilege over the 
 rest of mankind after affirming, in so many words, that every man 
 is the impersonation of a part of the Ultimate Power? Does he 
 mean to assert that some parts of this Ultimate Power are more 
 capable than others of forming a true estimate of Itself 1 Whence 
 did that portion of the Ultimate Power called Herbert Spencer 
 receive the warrant for assuming to itself superiority over other 
 parts of the Ultimate Power similarly conditioned? 
 
 The moral consequences entailed upon society by the universal 
 acceptance of the ideas embodied in the above passage would be 
 simply frightful! Every man being a Law and a god unto him- 
 self, his acts, whatever their nature, would be as right as those of 
 every other. The midnight assassin, his hands reeking in the 
 blood of his victim and his heart blackened by every foul thought, 
 could justly affirm that he was the moral equal of him who led a 
 pure and devout life consecrated to the highest aims; for is he 
 not, as much as the other, a part of the Ultimate Power? Mr. 
 Spencer, whose whole life has been a pure and irreproachable one, 
 would be the first to resent this application of his theories, but 
 that such are the conclusions which naturally flow from them I 
 cannot see how any one cai\deny. 
 
Atheism. 253 
 
 Chapter XII 
 
 Atheism. 
 
 "The Fool hath said in his heart, there is no God." — David. 
 <<* * * how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, where- 
 unto ye desire again to be in bondage." — St. Paul. 
 
 The tremendous tide of Atheistical belief which is now deluging 
 the scientific world, and through it the uneducated classes, is the 
 direct outcome of a false interpretation of the doctrine of Evolu- 
 tion. 
 
 The scientific inquirer, accustomed to deal with material things 
 and to express all his ideas in terms of Matter and Force, is too 
 often insensibly drawn from the contemplation of the spiritual, 
 and gradually comes to ignore its' existence. Puffed up with arro- 
 gance at what they have accomplished, these so-called lovers of 
 wisdom " attempt to fly up to the secrets of the Deity on the leaden 
 wings of the senses," and treat with contempt that within them 
 which can alone enable them to soar aloft. Fettered by material 
 bonds, they sink deepest when they deem their flight the highest. 
 
 Many of the most intelligent and successful workers in practical 
 science see nothing in this broad Universe but an assemblage of 
 atoms, uncaused and eternal, reacting upon one another in obedi- 
 ence to laws which they themselves have Evolved. 
 
 The existence of a Being who is not the Universe is positively 
 denied, or altogether ignored (which comes to the same thing) as 
 a Being of whom we know nothing and can know nothing, and in 
 whose existence we have no concern. 
 
 The word Athesim is derived from two Greek words (a, without, 
 and Theos, God,) signifying without God. The well-deserved 
 odium which attaches to this word has induced many whose sys- 
 tems are Atheistical to substitute other words to express their be- 
 lief. Hence the prevalence of the words Pantheism, Agnosticism, 
 and Monisticism. 
 
 Pantheistical notions have, indeed, existed from the earliest 
 
254 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 times, but were classed under the general name of Atheism.* The 
 word is derived from Pan, all, and Theos, God, and signifies that 
 all existence is God. * 
 
 About the year 1705, Toland established a society which took 
 the name of Pantheist, because its members professed to Worship 
 All Nature as their Deity ; and since that period and up to recent 
 times, the word has, for the most part, supplanted "Atheism " to 
 distinguish this system of thought. 
 
 The distinction between Pantheism and Atheism is obviously 
 but one of Name. . Both look upon the Universe as the One Un- 
 caused Existence. The Pantheist calls this existence a God, whilst 
 the Atheist abstains from giving it any distinctive title other than 
 the Universe. 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that the distinction between the two is 
 simply in the name. 
 
 The word "Agnosticism "(Gr. a, without, and gnosis, knowledge) 
 has come into very general use of late years, and has almost driven 
 out the other two.f It is intended to convey the notion that we 
 have not and can have no knowledge of the existence of a Being 
 who is not the Universe. It asserts, therefore, that the Universe 
 may he, and probably is, all-sufficient of itself, and that we have no 
 just right to believe that it has been Caused. In a word, if it does 
 not deny, it does not believe in, the existence of a Deity who is the 
 Author of the Universe, and holds that such knowledge is forever 
 unattainable. 
 
 This philosophy, or rather system (for it is not worthy of the 
 glorious name of philosophy) is, therefore, literally ivithout God, 
 and is, in its essential nature, absolutely indistinguishable from 
 Atheism. The attitude of the mind is one of unbelief, or passive 
 negation. 
 
 The word " Monism," or " Monisticism," which expresses the 
 
 * Spinoza was the author of the most elaborate Pantheistical system of 
 modern times. 
 
 t The word "Agnostic " is subject to two very different interpretations. It 
 may mean a confession of our inability to comprehend the ultimate nature of 
 the Deity ; and, in this sense, every devout Theist is an Agnostic. But the 
 word is never used in this sense, and it has become identified with that sys- 
 tem which teaches that we can have no apprehension of the existence of a 
 Being who is not the Universe, that is, of a Creator. 
 
Atheism. 255 
 
 belief that All Existence is an indivisible whole, a "Monon " is also 
 much in use with those who advocate Atheistical principles. The 
 old word Atheism has become so obnoxious from its vicious 
 associations that those theorists, many of whom are irreproachable 
 in their moral conduct, are only too glad to dress up the " Old 
 Hag " in any garb which will conceal her aged deformity. But 
 plume her as they will, her nature remains unchanged ; and it re- 
 quires but a superficial eye to penetrate beneath her specious 
 outside and detect all her native ugliness. It is curious as well 
 as instructive to note with what regularity these tidal waves of 
 Atheistical belief have swept over the civilized world, and their 
 appearance, with almost cyclical regularity, might justify us in be- 
 lieving that there is some law governing their recurrence.* But 
 with the recession of every new wave, more firm ground is lifted 
 above the reach of the waters ; and we may cherish a reasonable 
 hope that the accession will continue until the whole domain of 
 truth has been wrested from the dark and tempest-tossed waters of 
 error. " From evil much good may come ; ? ' and the shafts aimed 
 at the very life of truth may oftentimes render her invaluable 
 service by tearing away the wrappings of error in which mis- 
 guided Zeal has infolded her, thus enabling all mankind to behold 
 and appreciate her wondrous beauty. 
 
 A superficial survey of the history of Speculative thought from 
 the time of the Greeks enables us to lay down at least six periods 
 distinguished for the prevalence of Atheistical belief: 
 1st. The Middle Greek period, of which the chief representatives 
 were Leucippus and Democritus. Their errors were com- 
 bated and refuted by Plato and Aristotle. 
 2d. The Later Greek period, in which the errors of the preceding 
 age were revived by the skeptics, and did much to counter- 
 act the sublime truths of Plato and Aristotle. The fol- 
 lowers of Epicurus, perverting the theories of their mas- 
 ter, established a sect which became the shame of the hu- 
 man race, and Epicurianism became a synonym for all that 
 was low and sensual. The rise of the Alexandrian School 
 of Neo-Platonists, under Philo and others, did much to 
 
 * The dawn of every scientific revival has been obscured by the mists of 
 scepticism, but these noxious vapors have always been dispelled as knowledge 
 approached the zenith. 
 
256 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 stem this torrent. But the advent of Christ, and dissemi- 
 nation of His teachings, did more than all else to open the 
 eyes of men to their moral depravity, and to lead them to 
 the contemplation of higher things. 
 
 3d. The Mediaeval period, in which the Church itself was invaded 
 by unbelief, and became a hot-bed of theoretical as well as 
 practical atheism. A period when the dagger and the poi- 
 soned cup were oftentimes the readiest means to obtain the 
 papal crown ; when Koine became such a cess-pool of ini- 
 quity, that the good and the wise, fleeing from its polluted 
 atmosphere, sought the retirement of the convent or the 
 caves of the mountains, and spent the remainder of their 
 days in ascetic devotions. The depositaries of sacred 
 things becoming apostates to their high calling, had insti- 
 tuted a reign of crime and blood unparalled in the history 
 of the human race. And now, when the whole moral 
 world seemed verging on dissolution, when Atheism, under 
 the guise of religion, was working such wide-spread ruin, 
 a reaction began to set in, which culminated in the emanci- 
 pation of religion and full establishment of the Reforma- 
 tion. Atheism has never since regained its high position 
 in sacred places, nor wielded such a potent influence for 
 evil. 
 
 4th Period. The sixteenth and seventeenth centuries gave birth 
 to much Atheistical literature, but these speculations were 
 ably combated by such men as Bacon, Harve}^ Descartes, 
 Locke, and others. Addison, writing about the year 1712, 
 notes the decline of Atheism in his day : " It has been at- 
 tacked with so good success of late years that it is driven 
 out of all its outworks. The Atheist has not found his 
 post tenable, and is therefore retired into deism and a dis- 
 belief of revealed religion only. But the truth of it is, the 
 greatest number of this set of men are those who, for want 
 of a virtuous education, or examining the grounds of reli- 
 gion, know so very little of the matter in question that 
 their infidelity is but another term for their ignorance. As 
 folly and inconsiderateness are the foundations of infidelity, 
 the great pillars and supports of it are either a vanity of ap- 
 pearing wiser than the rest of mankind, or an ostentation of 
 
Good and Evil. 249 
 
 been a favorite theme with those who deny the existence of a 
 Beneficent Creator. Thus, Mr. Spencer, in referring to this sub- 
 ject, says (P. Biology, Vol. I, p. 344) : " With the conception of 
 two antagonistic powers, which severally work good and evil in 
 the world, the facts are congruous enough. But with the concep- 
 tion of a Supreme Beneficence, this gratuitous infliction of misery 
 on man, in common with all other terrestrial creatures capable of 
 feeling, is absolutely incompatible." One might imagine from this 
 passage that Mr. Spencer was a believer in the doctrines of Zo- 
 roaster, who taught that there are two Principles in the Universe 
 Ahriman, the Good, and Ormuzd, the Evil. The Good Principle, 
 we are told, sprang from the Eternal Essence itself ; but where 
 Ormuzd came from does not appear. We are also told that 
 Ahriman is finally to overcome Ormuzd, who is to be thrown into 
 outer darkness. To criticise an ancient and false religion by the 
 standards of the nineteenth century would be folly. But when a 
 system of philosophy, worked up by the light of this same nine- 
 teenth century, calmly tells us that the only explanation of the 
 existing order of things is on the theory that there are two antago- 
 nistic and irreconcilable Principles in the Universe — two separate 
 and distinct Uncaused Powers who divide the whole between them 
 — the novelty is somewhat startling. This would, indeed, be recog- 
 nizing a radical vice in the constitution of things, which he else- 
 where takes some pains to show cannot exist. It is obvious that 
 Mr. Spencer cannot believe what this passage conveys. What, 
 then does he mean? Whilst denying the existence of a Supreme 
 Beneficence, he still seems to recognize such things as Good and 
 Evil. His Ultimate Power, which he holds to be one with the 
 Universe, thus seems to be made up of two opposite principles 
 constantly warring one with the other. But why should the one 
 be called Good and the other Evil? Are they not both simply 
 Modes of his Ultimate Power? Why then this splitting up of the 
 Ultimate Power into two opposing Principles? One part of the 
 Ultimate Power cannot consistently be preferred over the other ! 
 Obviously, there is a net-work here before which his theories are 
 powerless. And here Mr. Spencer's whole moral system is under- 
 mined and left without a vestige of a foundation to rest upon. In 
 denying that mankind is possessed of a moral standard revealed 
 unto it by the Ultimate Power, and in affirming that Man and all 
 
250 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 things else are but Modes of this Ultimate Power, he thereby de- 
 nies that there can be anything like moral evil among men ; for if 
 there be no moral law to violate, there can be no moral evil. His 
 system can recognize no other form of Good and Evil than that 
 which is embraced under the terms Physical Good and Evil, and 
 which, as already defined, depend upon Material Expediency and 
 Inexpediency for their existence. 
 
 According to him, there is no distinction between the Evil 
 brought about by the tempest and the Evil committed by a human 
 being who, possessing the full light of the Law, deliberately assas- 
 sinates his fellow-man. To be consistent, he should regard the one 
 with the same feelings that he does the other. The tempest and 
 the murderer are alike Modes of his Ultimate Power: both destroy 
 human life, and both fill us with horror and dread. I repeat that 
 Mr. Spencer's system can make no distinction between them. But 
 what says that Something within us which we denominate the 
 Moral Sentiment? 
 
 A sense that a just and righteous law has been violated, that a 
 crime has been committed, is uppermost in our minds when we 
 contemplate the assassin which has no place when we regard the 
 wholesale destruction caused by the tempest, the pestilence, and 
 the famine. 
 
 Mr. Spencer cannot recognize in the Physical evil that the Uni- 
 verse presents anything which ought not tc be, for this would be 
 confessing a radical vice in the constitution of things, a position 
 which no sane mind can hold. Now, inasmuch as he recognizes 
 but One kind of Evil, that of physical consequences, it necessarily 
 follows that All things, man's thoughts and actions included, are 
 just exactly what they ought to be. The actions of what we call 
 the immoral man are thus precisely on the same footing of abso- 
 lute right as those of the most conscientious among us. Thus all 
 things are reduced to a dead level of indifference ; for the good of 
 his system, like its Evil, is nothing more than a different mode of 
 his Ultimate power. The result of his system is, therefore, to de- 
 stroy all morality, for it makes man an irresponsible agent, a mere 
 automaton ; while, at the same time, it offers no better solution for 
 the existence of Physical evil than the system which recognizes a 
 Beneficent Creator. This, too, looks out upon external nature, 
 and, with wise humility, sees in it nothing ivhich ought not to be, for 
 
Good and Evil. 251 
 
 it relies with implicit confidence upon Him who brought all things 
 into being. Only in the condition of disobedience on the part of 
 Man does it recognize a discord in the Universal harmony; but it 
 also teaches that this condition cannot be done away with by the 
 fiat of Omnipotence, without man, as a rational creature, being an- 
 nihilated with it. 
 
 The possibility of rebellion necessarily enters into the, constitution 
 of a Free Agent, and this is the foundation upon which all true 
 religion must rest. 
 
 The highest goal to which man can aspire, and to which all else 
 must be subordinated, is the realization of a "Just Life" and the 
 full development of that part about him which he looks upon as 
 the highest. The philosophy which does not contribute to the 
 compassing of this end proves false to its name, for the word was 
 coined by the old Greeks to designate a "Lover of Wisdom." 
 
 Any system of thought which, in its estimate of man and his 
 relations to the Author of his being and to his fellow-man, fails to 
 take into account that inner Something which no language can ex- 
 press and which makes him what he is, should not receive the 
 name of Philosophy. 
 
 The harmony which exists between the revealed moral code and 
 the best material interests of man may enable such a system of 
 thought to verify its utility, but the Spirit which gives it life can- 
 not be apprehended or appreciated — religion with its accompanying- 
 moral sentiment can alone do this. The Life that is chiseled out 
 mechanically along the lines of material expediency may thus very 
 nearly resemble in outward form that which springs from the moral 
 sense, but in essence they are as widely separated as the Antip- 
 odes. In the eyes of the one, the " widow's mite " sinks into un- 
 utterable contempt ; with the other, this mite infinitely outbalances 
 the rich man's glittering gold. 
 
 The morality which springs from Religion and the morality 
 which springs from this so-called philosophy bear the same rela- 
 tion to one another that an Egyptian mummy does to a man in 
 the hey-day of his youth and strength. 
 
 He who attempts to discover the essential nature of morality by 
 the light of materia] expediency alone will fare about as well as 
 he who gropes, with scalpel and microscope, among the cells and 
 
252 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 fibers of the brain in search of the faculty of Intelligence.* Phi- 
 losophy divorced from Religion may be compared to an eagle with 
 its wings clipped ; its home is, indeed, on the heights and its legit- 
 imate sphere the realms of light, but shorn of that which enables 
 it to soar, it must needs grovel, and soon loses all nobility and 
 glory. 
 
 * " We cannot discover any such practical interest arising from pure prin- 
 ciples of reason as morality and religion present. On the contrary, pure em- 
 piricism seems to empty them of all their power and influence. If there does 
 not exist a Supreme Being distinct from the world — if the world is without a 
 beginning, consequently without a Creator — if our wills are not free, and the 
 soul is divisible and subject to corruption just like matter — the ideas and prin- 
 ciples of morality lose all validity , and fall with the transcendental ideas which 
 constituted their theoretical support." — Kant, Critique of Pure Reason ; trans- 
 lated by Meikle John. 
 
Atheism. 257 
 
 courage in despising the terrors of another world, which 
 have so great an influence on what they call weaker minds ; 
 or an aversion to a belief that must cut them off from many 
 of those pleasures they propose to themselves, and fill them 
 with remorse for many of those they have already tasted." 
 5th. The Fifth Cycle reached its acme during the latter part of 
 the last century, and attained its greatest strength in France. 
 The evils of the French Revoluticm, though directly the re- 
 sult of bad government and oppression, were no doubt im- 
 measurably aggravated by the wide-spread influence of 
 Atheistical teachings. Atheism engrafted on illiteracy and 
 superstition form a combination which staggers the mind to 
 contemplate. The crimes of the French nation were ex- 
 piated by the blood of thousands of its best citizens, and 
 the terrible storm seemed to have had a purifying effect 
 upon the morale of the whole people, for Atheism lost 
 much of its popularity. 
 6th. The tidal wave which is now upon us is really a continuation 
 of the preceding cycle, to which a new impetus has been 
 given by the establishment of the theory of Evolution, and 
 a false interpretation of the same. The condition of society 
 throughout Europe to-day has many points of resemblance 
 to that which existed in France during the latter half of 
 the past century. "Nihilism" is the offspring of oppres- 
 sion fostered by Atheism. "Neither God nor King," is 
 the motto which they have written in characters of blood 
 upon the standard which pollutes the pure breezes of heaven. 
 "Dynamite" is their battle-cry; murder and rapine their 
 watchwords. The fair name of Liberty they have tarnished, 
 and her noble form they have torn from its high pedestal 
 and dragged in the mire. 
 The would-be philosophers of the day have much to answer for 
 in letting loose the fiends of unbelief upon the world. The holy 
 spirit of Freedom, which teaches man to assert his native dignity 
 and to rise against oppression, they might have guided to the com- 
 passing of noble ends; but they have chosen to sow the seeds of 
 Atheism, thereby diverting this grand spirit from its legitimate 
 channels, thus encouraging anarchy and crime. Anarchy and 
 Atheism, with the illiterate, go hand in hand and are inseparable; 
 17 
 
258 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 and, indeed, what is Atheism itself but Moral Anarchy, where the 
 very foundations of right and wrong are swept away, leaving the 
 conduct of life based upon nothing but the shifting sands of ex- 
 pediency ? 
 
 Fortunately for the human race, the influence which these spec- 
 ulators exercise is but transitory, and, after the novelty of their 
 doctrines has worn off, that ineradicable principle in man called 
 his moral nature rises up" in judgment against them, and they and 
 their doctrines are hurled from their high place in the esteem of 
 men and either consigned to oblivion or to a lasting infamy. No 
 earnest seeker after truth can be permanently misled by their hair- 
 splitting sophistries, and sooner or later the touch-stone of truth 
 which resides within him will reveal the lurking fallacies upon 
 which their theories are based ; and, on the other hand, how quickly 
 will it teach him to follow the lead of the true philosopher and 
 prepare his mind for the reception of the highest truths ! How 
 surely will it enable him to discriminate between two such writers 
 as Bacon* and Hume, and to recognize in the one the true philos- 
 opher, nature's high priest, officiating at her altars with pure hands 
 and devout spirit, earnestly seeking the truth, and imparting it to 
 others with the most exalted consciousness of his high mission ; in 
 the other, the juggler, whose highest aim is the plaudits of the 
 crowd before whom he plays his mountebank tricks ! Hume, in 
 his "Dialogue on Natural Theology 7 ' and "Essay on Suicide," 
 has well illustrated how the most obvious truths may be obscured 
 and distorted by the tricks of the Sophist. 
 
 * Bacon, in his devotion to the cause of philosophy, well redeemed a char- 
 acter before blackened by public mal-administration and disregard of the highest 
 claims of friendship. "Bacon seeking the great seal and Bacon searching for 
 truth were two very different beings." 
 
 "Hapless in his choice, 
 Unfit to stand the civil storm of state, 
 And through the smooth barbarity of courts, 
 . With firm but pliant virtue, forward still 
 To urge his course ; him for the studious shade 
 Kind nature formed ; deep, comprehensive, clear, 
 Exact, and elegant ; in one rich soul, 
 Plato, the Stagyrite and Tully joined— 
 The great deliverer he ! " 
 
 — Thompson's Seasons. 
 
Atheism. 259 
 
 Even were it impossible to arrive at an apprehension of the ex- 
 istence of a Deity by reason alone, (which the writer does not ac- 
 cept,) yet we have that moral consciousness of his existence which, 
 in certainty, transcends the powers of logic; for, says Descartes, 
 " J'ai tire* la preuve de l'existence de Dieu de Tidee" que je trouve 
 en moi d'un §tre souverainement parfait." 
 
 Immanuel Kant, near the close of his great work, the "Critique 
 of Pare Reason," which is largely devoted to adverse criticisms of 
 the arguments usually advanced to prove the existence of the 
 Deity, fully recognized the paramount importance of following the 
 lead and accepting the promptings of our moral nature. He says : 
 "For in this sphere action is absolutely necessary, that is, I must 
 act in obedience to the moral law in all points. The end is here 
 incontrovertibly established, and there is only one condition pos- 
 sible, according to the best of my perception, under which this end 
 can harmonize with all other ends and so have practical validity — 
 namely, the existence of a God and of a future world. I know also, 
 to a certainty, that no one can be acquainted with any other con- 
 ditions which conduct to the same unity of ends under the moral 
 law. But since the moral precept is at the same time my maxim, 
 (as reason requires that it should be,) I am irresistibly constrained 
 to believe in the existence of God and in a future life; and I am sure 
 that nothing can make me waver in this belief since I should thereby 
 overthrow my moral maxims, the renunciation of which would render 
 me hateful in my own eyes."* 
 
 Such is the final verdict rendered by Germany's greatest thinker 
 upon this all-important question. Notwithstanding the overwhelm- 
 ing testimony of our moral nature, there are those who utterly dis- 
 regard this highest of all proofs, and require supporting arguments 
 from the faculty of logic ere they are willing to acknowledge its 
 truth. One might with justice question their possession of a moral 
 sense, so utterly do they contemn its behests. The power of the 
 reasoning faculty to demonstrate the existence of a (rod has often 
 been denied, yet the writer is firmly persuaded that this, the great- 
 est of our endowments after the moral sense, has not been so slighted 
 by its great Creator as to have withheld from it the power of 
 proving that Creator's existence. In the preceding pages, we have 
 already advanced arguments to show that what we call the Mate- 
 * '' Critique of Pure Reason," translated by Meikle John. 
 
260 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 rial Universe is not adequate to meet the demands of the Absolute 
 Infinite, (see Chapter IV.) It follows, as a necessary corollary, 
 that the Material Universe cannot be an Uncaused Existence, for 
 an Uncaused Existence must be an Absolutely Infinite and Un- 
 conditioned Being. But if the Universe is not Uncaused, it must 
 have had a Cause, which is itself Uncaused, and in this Uncaused 
 Cause we recognize the Deity. Thus reason, as well as the moral 
 sense, negatives a material conception of the Supreme Being. To 
 those who accept the data which science has given us, the doctrine 
 of Evolution, as interpreted in the foregoing pages, will furnish 
 corroborative proof of the existence of a Being who is not one 
 with the Universe. 
 
 The strength of this argument lies in showing that the Universe 
 has not always existed as it now presents itself to us, but that it 
 has gradually grown to its present state, so that the contemplation 
 of it occasions in the mind the idea of progress from a beginning. 
 From a scientific stand-point, we are bound to admit that what we 
 call the Universe has been generated, and if generated, then it has 
 had a beginning and a Beginner. 
 
 Let us now examine, by the light of the doctrine of Evolution, 
 the various Atheistical propositions that have been advanced from 
 time to time to explain the nature of things. 
 
 1. The Universe has always existed as it is at the present time. 
 
 2. Matter and Force are MODES of an UNKNOWN reality (Spencer) 
 
 and together make up the unknown reality of which the Uni- 
 verse consists. 
 
 3. The Universe owes its existence to a Force acting upon the matter 
 
 wtiich existed from all Eternity, but the Force is not an Intelli- 
 gent Entity. 
 
 4. The Something we call Matter is the only Real Existence, and 
 
 perpetual change of place is one of its attributes ; and the Some- 
 thing we call Force is merely the sensations which this change of 
 place occasions within us. 
 
 The first proposition, that the Universe has always existed as it is 
 at the present time, is positively disproved by the evidences 
 of Geology and other indisputable facts upon which the doc- 
 trine of true Evolution rests. This naked assertion, there- 
 fore, requires no further refutation. 
 
 The Second proposition embodies the Monistic philosophy, and is 
 
Atheism. 261 
 
 that entertained by Spencer, Haeckel, and Atheists in general. 
 It asserts the unity of Matter and Force, that is to say, the 
 Matter and Force which make up what we call the Universe, 
 are but modes or conditions of the unknowable Reality ; 
 and, when considered together, constitute this unknowable or 
 Uncaused Being. This philosophy, therefore, asserts that the 
 Universe is an Uncaused Existence, and, therefore, never had 
 a beginning. Hence, at no time could the process of Invo- 
 lution (so-called Evolution of Spencer) have had a commence- 
 ment. Now, if the process never had a beginning, it is evi- 
 dent that the Universe must have always existed just as it is, 
 for by the proposition it could never have commenced to be 
 other than what it was originally. For if the contrary be 
 held, then the process had a beginning. Now, a beginning 
 could only take place in a Finite Time, but, by the proposi- 
 tion, Matter and Force, which comprehend the Totality of 
 Being, have existed from eternity; therefore, there must have 
 been Something outside of Matter and Force to set the pro- 
 cess going, (for how was it that they had existed from eternity 
 without action, and suddenly commenced to act ?) but this 
 outside Something is contrary to the original proposition. 
 The Monistic philosophy, therefore, when carefully examined, 
 really denies that there has been any change in the original 
 condition of things. The absurdity of this conclusion is 
 shown by the truths of Evolution. Mr. Spencer, recognizing 
 the difficulties which the facts of Evolution present to the 
 denial of a definite beginning to the phenomenal Universe, 
 attempts to overcome the difficulty by asserting that there "is 
 an alternation of Involution (his Evolution) and Dissolution 
 in the Totality of things," and that " we can no longer con- 
 template the visible creation as having a definite beginning or 
 end," (First Prin., p. 551.) By which he means to assert that 
 this period of Involution will be followed by a period of Dis- 
 solution, which, in its turn, will give place to another period 
 of Involution, and so on in an endless cycle of ever-recurring 
 changes. The absurdity of this is at once apparent when we 
 reflect that he postulates existence from eternity for both of 
 these conditions of Involution and Dissolution. 
 In the third proposition we see it laid down that the Universe owes 
 
262 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 its existence to two primarily independent agents: a non-intel- 
 ligent force and the atoms of matter. Both are from all 
 eternity, and are, therefore, equal, for as neither gave origin 
 to the other, the one cannot be said to be more powerful than 
 the other. If it be admitted that there was a time when things 
 were not as they are, then they must have had a beginning. 
 Now, as these two independent and equal agents existed from 
 eternity without acting upon each other, what influenced them 
 so to act at the definite time postulated by the word begin- 
 ning ? It is obvious that a third Something came into play 
 and brought about a union of the two ; but this third Some- 
 thing, by the proposition, did not exist, hence there could have 
 been no beginning ; but if there was no beginning, then the 
 Universe has always existed as it is, and the absurdity of this 
 has already been shown. 
 The Fourth proposition asserts that the Something we call Matter is 
 the only real existence, and that perpetual change of place is 
 one of its attributes ; and the Something we call Force is 
 merely the sensations which this change of place occasions 
 within us. This proposition, as well as the third, are really 
 but different ways of wording the second. The inadequacy 
 of what we call matter to fill up the definition of absolute 
 infinity or Uncaused existence has already been sufficiently 
 demonstrated. Moreover, according to this proposition, there 
 could have been no beginning to the visible Universe, for this 
 would presuppose something outside which induced the 
 change from the original etern a /state in which matter existed. 
 But this outside Something is contrary to the proposition. 
 The Universe, therefore, must have been as it is now from all 
 Eternity, and the absurdity of this has already been demon- 
 strated. 
 Thus Atheism, however it be worded, is reducible to the same 
 summing up. 
 
 We are thus forced of necessity to fall back upon the Existence 
 of a Supreme, Unconditioned Will Power, the Author and Sus- 
 tainer of all. We are compelled by all the laws of reason to re- 
 gard the act of Creation as a Free Will act, that is to say, the visi- 
 ble Universe cannot be conceived of as existing through Necessity, 
 but through the absolute Free Will of an absolutely unconditioned 
 
Atheism. 263 
 
 Being. Mr. Spencer, in confounding the Universe with his Un- 
 knowable, is thus driven by necessity to deny that it ever had a 
 beginning. But when we regard the visible Universe as merely 
 the manifestation of an Absolute Will, and are careful not to con- 
 found the effects of this Will with the essential nature of the 
 Power which exercised the Will, then the difficulty disappears, 
 and we can conceive of the Universe having a beginning. 
 
 If from the scientific the mind turns to contemplate the moral 
 aspect of Atheism, it is at once enveloped in folds compared with 
 which " the palpable obscure " of Milton is as radiant noon. If, 
 in the face of the arguments adduced above, it still be maintained 
 that we have no logical proof of the existence of a Being distinct 
 from the Universe, yet no one with any claim to powers of rea- 
 soning will hold that it can be disproved. 
 
 Whilst I look upon the arguments already advanced as abso- 
 lutely conclusive, still, for the sake of further argument, let it be 
 granted that it is impossible, by means of Speculative reason alone, 
 to prove or disprove the existence of a Being who is not the 
 Universe, but the creator of it. The mental attitude will then be 
 one of doubt ; there may be or there may not be such a Being ; 
 the logical arguments in proof of the one being neutralized by 
 equally strong logical arguments in proof of the other. 
 
 Here, then, we have a condition of equilibrium. Now, if it can 
 be shown that this equilibrium, to which the exercise of pure specu- 
 lative reason has brought us, can be disturbed by any considera- 
 tions whatsoever, then we are compelled, in all reason, to accept as 
 truth that side in whose favor the scale turns. The considerations 
 which may be advanced to destroy this Equilibrium of doubt are 
 drawn, not from the province of Speculative reason, the arguments 
 of which, on both sides, are supposed to be exhausted, but from 
 the domain of the Practical. Is it advantageous or disadvantageous 
 to the Cause of Right living to accept belief in the existence of 
 such a Being? Has this belief aided, or retarded the growth of 
 civilization ? The answers to these questions will settle the argu- 
 ment once and for all. Where is the right-minded or moderately 
 well-informed man who will hesitate as to the answer? Will any 
 one have the hardihood to assert that this belief has not been of 
 great advantage to the race, and that disbelief among the Masses 
 
264 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 has always resulted in moral retrogression ? I appeal to the stern 
 verdict of facts. 
 
 Will it be argued that there are many who disbelieve in such a 
 Being who are yet, in all points, conscientious in the discharge of 
 the duties of life? This may be true, but how few their number, 
 and how seldom are they met with beyond the sphere of the schools 
 of thought. Besides, as I shall attempt to show, these men, by 
 whatsoever motives they may be influenced, lead conscientious 
 lives in spite of their belief rather than in accordance with it ; and 
 there is, with them, no unity or concordance between the conduct 
 of life and the theories which they maintain. There is, indeed, 
 perpetual war between the promptings of their moral sense on the 
 one hand and the teachings of their system on the other. Practi- 
 cally, they are compelled so to adjust their lives as if they looked 
 upon themselves as Free agents and responsible beings, yet they 
 theoretically maintain that they are but links in a chain of inex- 
 orable fate, and, therefore, in no wise responsible for the opinions 
 they may hold or the acts which they may commit. The Universe 
 is all in all to them, for they maintain that it has not been created, 
 and that there is no Being distinct from it who has called it into 
 existence. As they recognize the existence of Nothing but the 
 Universe, and as they are compelled to regard themselves as a 
 part thereof, it is obvious that Moral Wrong can have no existence 
 for them, all things being on an equal footing of absolute right 
 Thus the application of their theories to the conduct of life would 
 necessarily result in the destruction of all morality, to say nothing of 
 religion. The Atheistical philosopher, so-called, by the range of 
 his knowledge and the powers of his understanding, may arrive at 
 the truth that the Moral Law which we all accept is best for the 
 material interests of humanity, and thus he may be confirmed in 
 the practice thereof, and be deterred from the commission of deeds 
 which would tend to the destruction of society. But how would 
 it be with the Atheistical ignorant ? Loosed from the restraints 
 of laws which he, very justly, recognizes as binding no longer, for 
 the binding force of a law depends upon the law-giver, what is to 
 deter him from pursuing a course of life directly contrary to the 
 Moral Code? State enactment may indeed, and, in a measure, 
 does throw checks around his conduct, by holding out punishment 
 for the violation of the secular law, which is based upon the Moral 
 
Atheism. 265 
 
 Code; but, whilst the fear of punishment by the arm of justice 
 may deter from crime, it cannot lift or moralize the man. Remove 
 the arm of justice or weaken its power, and how soon do the pas- 
 sions of evil men gain the ascendant, converting the community in 
 which they live into a very Hell. Turn your eyes upon the Nihil- 
 istic movements of the day and read the motto emblazoned on its 
 blood-stained banner ; search out the haunts of vice and crime, and 
 behold the legitimate results of disbelief in the existence of a Bene- 
 ficent Creator. u By its fruits shall the tree be knoivn." Will any 
 reasonable man, in the face of these incontrovertible facts, dare 
 deny that belief in a Being distinct from the Universe is to the 
 best interests of Humanity? If the Atheist acknowledges, as he 
 is compelled to do, that this belief is in accord with the highest 
 interests of mankind, then sound judgment must lead him to accept 
 the truth of that which lies at the very foundations of the social 
 edifice, and which has enabled man to elevate himself above the 
 brute and assume his proper station at the head of terrestrial crea- 
 tion. Can the belief whose influence and elevating power brought 
 all this about be a false one or make-shift, as Mr. Spencer would 
 have us think ? Are we justified in replacing it by a belief which, 
 even in the domain of speculative reason, is without a tenable basis 
 to rest upon, and which, in the domain of the Practical, robs the 
 moral law of all validity, and confounds all distinction between 
 right and wrong, which, in a word, destroys the very foundations 
 of morality and religion ? 
 
 Did belief in the existence of a Supreme Beneficence have no 
 practical interest for humanity — were it a subject in which the 
 schools of philosophy were alone concerned — much might be par- 
 doned to an erratic mind entangled in the mazes of speculative 
 reason ; but how are we to extenuate cold-blooded attacks upon 
 the very highest interests of the race, in open defiance to truths 
 the weight of which even the most ordinary intelligence can ap- 
 preciate ? 
 
 The Pantheist or Atheist, in order to give his position even the 
 air of truth, and to justify his attempt to invalidate the practical 
 considerations adduced, should be able to prove with absolute cer- 
 tainty that there is no Being distinct from the Universe. So far 
 from being able to do this, he is unable to maintain his position 
 against the Theist even on the ground of Speculative reason alone. 
 
266 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 But even were be able to advance speculative arguments in favor 
 of his position which could not be assailed by any weapons in the 
 armory of pure reason, still I, for one, would rather doubt the va- 
 lidity of the reasoning faculty than question the irresistible prompt- 
 ings of the moral sense, and the incontrovertible testimony fur- 
 nished by the practical influence of Theistical belief upon the 
 well-being of the race. 
 
 It has, indeed, been a most fortunate thing for Humanity that 
 the conservation of this great truth has not been intrusted to the 
 erring reason of fallible men, but so ingrained in their very nature 
 that it is only by willfully closing their eyes that they can shut out 
 the light which comes streaming in upon them on every hand. It 
 does not require the acumen and learning of the astronomer to 
 teach the meanest understanding that the Sun gives light and heat, 
 nor does it require the reasoning of philosophy to persuade men 
 of a truth which they cannot fail to recognize so long as they are 
 true to themselves. 
 
 The arguments contained in the preceding pages are, therefore, 
 only for those in whom the beacon's light set up in every soul has 
 been obscured by the haze of doubt engendered by the bogs of 
 Sophistry and Scepticism. 
 
 Summary. 
 
 Under one or the other of the following headings must all be- 
 lief concerning the existence of a Supreme Existence be classed : * 
 
 Theism. Atheism. 
 
 Def. : Belief in the existence Del : Belief that the Universe 
 of a Supreme Uncaused Being is itself the Supreme Uncaused 
 who is not the Universe but the existence. 
 Author of it 
 
 For the sake of giving our opponent every possible advantage, 
 let it be granted that, on the ground of pure speculative reason, the 
 arguments for the one are neutralized by equally strong arguments 
 
 *The Agnostics, or " Know-Nothings," inasmuch as they do not believe 
 (though they do not deny) in the existence of a Being distinct from the Uni- 
 verse, must be classed with the Atheists, for they are literally without a God. 
 
Atheism. 
 
 267 
 
 for the other. The Equilibrium of doubt thus established is still 
 utterly destroyed in favor of Theism by the following arguments, 
 drawn from the domain of the Practical: 
 
 The experience of all ages and 
 nations teaches that Theistical 
 belief has been most conducive 
 to the welfare of Mankind and 
 the progress of Civilization by : 
 
 1. In holding up a conception 
 for human worship which is not 
 subject to the limitations and cor- 
 rupting influences of the senses, 
 thereby affording unbounded 
 scope for the development and 
 exercise of the religious feelings 
 innate in every human being, 
 thus fulfilling the highest needs 
 of the individual and of the 
 race. 
 
 2. In giving validity to the 
 moral law in the conduct of life, 
 thus insuring the most thorough 
 adjustment of the will of the 
 individual to the best moral and 
 material interests of humanity. 
 
 The experience of all ages and 
 nations teaches that Atheistical 
 belief has militated against the 
 material and intellectual pro- 
 gress of the Race by : 
 
 1. In rendering the religious 
 sentiment null and void by rob- 
 bing it of a conception which is 
 necessary to supply its wants. 
 Man cannot worship the Uni- 
 verse as a whole, nor yet any 
 part of it. Sound judgment 
 compels him to regard himself 
 as the highest expression of the 
 Universe with which he is ac- 
 quainted, hence, if he worship 
 anything, it must be himself, 
 but a well-balanced mind can- 
 not accept this conclusion ; it is 
 sheer madness. 
 
 2. In robbing the moral law 
 of all validity by undermining 
 the principles which give it theo- 
 retical support. The mass of 
 mankind are thus left without 
 sure guides to conduct, and all 
 ideas of right and wrong are 
 confounded ; and he only can 
 aspire to a life that is in accord 
 with the best material interests 
 of the race, who, by his learning 
 and understanding, is able to 
 verify the utility of the Moral 
 Code. 
 
 But even in this attempt at 
 verification, he falsifies his own 
 
268 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 position, for, whilst theoretically 
 confounding good and evil, 
 (words which can have no real 
 significance to him,) he is still 
 compelled to act as if he consid- 
 ered himself a free agent, and 
 responsible for his conduct. Un- 
 compromising warfare is thus 
 established between theoretical 
 teaching and the practical con- 
 duct of life. 
 To the cry, "Whence are we, and whither are we tending?" 
 which has been echoed down the ages since intellect first dawned 
 upon the world, the Atheist has for answer: "Behold the clod 
 beneath your feet and recognize the source from which you came 
 and the goal to which you are tending." When we ask for an in- 
 telligent Creator, the Materialist literally gives us dirt! In the 
 ultimate atoms of matter we are to behold our Creator. This dead 
 matter, which we make subservient to all our needs, which we have 
 subjugated and made our willing slave, is our God! For that 
 Something within us which we call intellect, mind, or what you 
 will, the Atheist ascribes no other cause than the action of the 
 atoms and molecules of this dead matter. "The winged words 
 and fiery thoughts of the Poet, the Philosopher, and the States- 
 man are only the result of the play of atoms." There is no such 
 thing as an intellectual principle ; it is merely a natural phenomenon, 
 a result of vital action, and on a par with the rolling thunder and 
 flashing lightning. Says Mr. Huxley, (Belfast address:) "The 
 thoughts to which I am now giving utterance, and your thoughts 
 regarding them, are the expressions of molecular changes in that 
 matter of life which is the source of all other vital action." The 
 affections, love, friendship, duty, honor, are all to be formulated 
 in terms of matter and force, (rood and Evil mean nothing more 
 than Expediency and Inexpediency. Our standard of right and 
 wrong is to be measured by utility, and the sting of what we call 
 conscience is nothing more than the uneasiness resulting from a 
 diseased nervous system. There is no room for unselfishness in 
 this philosophy, for the doctrine of Utility is its foundation-stone. 
 The acts of self-sacrifice and heroism which have commanded the 
 
Atheism. 269 
 
 admiration of mankind in all ages of the world were acts of folly 
 or insanity, instigated by treacherous atoms, which, for the time, 
 threw out of gear the mechanism of the brain. And this is the 
 philosophy which the Materialist gives us to nourish our moral 
 needs. When we ask for wholesome diet, we are offered food worse 
 than the apples which grew on the brink of the lake Asphaltes, for 
 they were fair without, though ashes within; but the food which 
 the Materialist gives us is foul without and worse than ashes 
 within. 
 
 When we ask the question, "Whither are we tending?" the 
 Materialist points to the narrow grave, and gives us immortality 
 in the ashes which lie moldering there. Human progress and 
 development are to him limited to the narrow span of this state of 
 being, and when this world will have ceased to be, progress and 
 Evolution will have run their course; the great cycle will have 
 been completed, and the wondrous machine of the Universe will 
 be resolved into the atoms which gave it birth. 
 
 "Roll on, ye stars, exult in youthful prime, 
 Mark with bright curves the printless steps of time ; 
 Near and more near your beamy cars approach, 
 And lessening orbs on lessening orbs encroach. 
 Flowers of the sky ! ye too to age must yield, 
 Frail as your silken sisters of the field ! 
 Star after star from heaven's high arch shall rush, 
 Suns sink on suns, and systems, systems crush, 
 Headlong, extinct, to one dark center fall, 
 And death, and night, and chaos mingle all ! " 
 
 — Dr. Erasmus Darwin. 
 
 It is one of the admitted scientific conclusions of the day that 
 the world which we inhabit is destined to become an arid waste, 
 incapable of supporting the simplest forms of life. We are told 
 by astronomers that the moon has already reached that stage of 
 its existence. The time, therefore, is approaching when the human 
 race and all living things will have ceased to exist, and the sur- 
 face of the earth, which now teems with sentient beings, will be a 
 vast, silent desert. Living things will probably disappear from 
 the face of the earth in the reverse order in which they appeared ; 
 first, Man, and so on down the scale to the lowest animal and 
 plant. The human race, cut off from a future life, dies with the 
 world which gave it birth. Behold a dead world, the grave of all 
 
270 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 human effort, hopes, and aspirations! And this is what Atheism 
 gives us when we ask for immortality ! 
 
 It cannot be denied that the great error of Atheism is to-day 
 espoused by some of the principal leaders of scientific thought. 
 These men have, apparently, deluded themselves into the belief 
 that they are doing the world a great service by tearing down what 
 they are pleased to term the spiritual idols of the race. Their re- 
 lations in public and private life are beyond reproach, and the 
 moral code by which they guide their own conduct is the same as 
 that of the most orthodox Christian; yet they do not scruple to 
 overturn the only support upon which that moral code rests. 
 Their lives may be models of practical virtue, but they advocate 
 principles which, if lived up to and assimilated, would render so- 
 ciety impossible and petrify all the higher emotions of the soul. 
 Where shall we seek an explanation for this extraordinary incon- 
 sistency? Accustomed to dwell upon the tangible world of matter 
 which surrounds them, they have come to ignore the existence of 
 that world from whose arsenal they have drawn the weapons which 
 have enabled them to pursue their career of conquest. In adopt- 
 ing the motto* which the wise men of "Solomon's House" formu- 
 lated for their own guidance, they have forgotten its spirit and 
 have become so intoxicated at the extension of man's dominion 
 over nature that they have lost all sense of the just relations of 
 things, and fly from one absurdity to another. By some he is 
 reckoned no higher than the brutes of the field, whilst others rec- 
 ognize no limit to his power. Some of these blind fanatics have 
 actually Deified him. What are we coming to when one of our 
 would-be instructors gives expression to such a thought as this: 
 "The dim and shadowy outlines of the Superhuman Deity fade 
 slowly away from before us, and as the mist of his presence floats 
 aside, we perceive with greater and greater clearness the shape of 
 a yet grander and nobler figure — of Him who made all Gods and 
 shall unmake them. * * * From the dim dawn of history, 
 and from the innermost depths of every soul, the face of father 
 Man looks out upon us with the fire of eternal youth in his eyes 
 and says, 'Before Jehovah was, I am,' " (Clifford.) 
 
 *The end of our foundation is the knowledge of causes and secret mo- 
 tions of things, and the enlarging of the hounds of human empire to the effect- 
 ing of all things possible. — Bacon's New Atlantis. 
 
Atheism. 271 
 
 Having traced man's origin from the atom, they would now ele- 
 vate him to the dignity of a God! " O judgment, thou art fled to 
 brutish beasts, and men have lost their reason ! " 
 
 Under the leadership of such men war is waged against the 
 most sacred things, and on every side we see the hand of the de- 
 stroyer. 
 
 Some of our principal seats of learning are hot-beds of Materi- 
 alistic teaching, and young men just entering upon life, with all 
 its grave responsibilities, pride themselves on believing nothing 
 which has a religious tendency. They deny the existence of a 
 Supreme Beneficence, for they are afraid of being considered be- 
 hind the age, but they accept without hesitation all the absurdities 
 of Involution or Atheistical Evolution. 
 
 We may arraign the advocates of the theory of Involution or 
 False Evolution before the bar of Truth on the following charges 
 of gross absurdity : 
 
 1. They designate their theory Evolution when the process they 
 
 describe is one of Involution. 
 
 2. They assert that the Universe is an Uncaused Existence, yet 
 
 they affirm that it is subject to progress, and that the seeds of 
 its origin existed in a jjrevious state of Dissolution. Dissolu- 
 tion thus becomes the Cause of Involution, and Involution 
 will become the Cause of Dissolution. They assert that the 
 totality of existence is embraced by both at alternate periods. 
 As far as elevation in the scale of Being is concerned, both 
 are exactly on a par, being merely different modes of Exis- 
 tence which their Universe God assumes, for some of them 
 call the Universe a God, and designate themselves Pantheists. 
 
 3. Practically, they regard themselves as immeasurably superior to 
 
 the dust they tread beneath tneir feet, whilst they affirm that 
 the atoms and their inherent (unendowed) forces brought 
 them forth by their own unaided power. 
 
 4. Under the guise of a pretended humility, the Agnostic or 
 
 ''Know-nothing" is guilty of the most tremendous presump- 
 tion ; for in holding that there may not be a Being distinct 
 from the Universe — that the Universe itself may be the Un 
 caused Being — he thereby assumes that it is possible for the 
 human mind to subject to analysis the very essence of Uncaused 
 Beitm'. 
 
272 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 The Agnostic's negation of all positive knowledge thus in- 
 volves, by implication, the possibility that he may be pos- 
 sessed of the Ultimate Secret of Things. 
 
 5. They recognize themselves as natural products, yet they con- 
 
 stant^ reason as if they stood outside of nature ; for whilst 
 they claim for themselves certain attributes, as conscious ex- 
 istence, Intelligence, Designing power, &c, they deny these 
 attributes to the nebulous cloud whence they trace their origin ; 
 thus, 
 
 6. They run into the absurdity of postulating a Causative Power 
 
 which is Inferior to the Effect it produces. 
 
 7. They place at defiance not only the teachings of science, but 
 
 the loftier promptings of the Moral Sense. Science asserts True 
 progress, whilst their theory when examined makes no dis- 
 tinction between progress and retrogression or Dissolution, for 
 both conditions are equal, and alternately give rise to one 
 another. Human progress with them is limited to this sphere 
 of being, and when the Earth has arrived at that stage of ex- 
 istence when it will be incapable of supporting life, the pro- 
 cess will cease, and Dissolution will set in. Thus True Evo- 
 lution becomes an impossibility. 
 
 8. They annihilate the whole moral world, and render all true reli- 
 
 gion impossible. All of our ideas and emotions are to be 
 expressed in terms of matter and force. 
 
 Virtue and vice mean nothing more than the difference in 
 the arrangement of the molecules of which the brain is com- 
 posed; there is, therefore, no such thing as moral responsi- 
 bility. Might becomes the arbiter of the right; and justice 
 and virtue must be relegated to the dim shades of a super- 
 stitious past. 
 
 In conclusion, we may quote the language which Mr. Spen- 
 cer uses in criticising the doctrine of Special Creation. 
 
 Thus, however regarded, the theory of Involution or Athe- 
 istical Evolution " turns out to be worthless — worthless by its 
 derivation; worthless in its intrinsic incoherence; worthless 
 as absolutely without evidence ; worthless as not supplying an 
 intellectual need ; worthless as not satisfying a moral want. 
 We must, therefore, consider it as counting for nothing in op- 
 
Atheism. 273 
 
 position to any other hypothesis respecting the origin of the 
 Universe." 
 
 And thus we are compelled to admit the existence of an 
 Uncaused, Immaterial, Divine Being. In the beginning He 
 created matter, and — if we accept the doctrine of True Evo- 
 lution — impressed upon it those laws or forces by virtue of 
 which the innumerable worlds and man himself were brought 
 forth. 
 
 In the immortality held out to us by religion, the word 
 Evolution comes to have a new and grander significance. 
 
 Atheism and Evolution are irreconcilable and contradic- 
 tory ; Religion and Evolution go hand in hand, and elucidate 
 one another, for it holds out the promise of a never-ending 
 development. 
 Those who will follow the behests of their higher nature need 
 not be without the light and consolation which belief in a Supreme 
 Beneficence pours in upon the mind, cheering and smoothing life's 
 pathway, and elevating the individual to a just appreciation of his 
 high destiny. 
 
 From the broad bosom of Material Creation, and from the in- 
 nermost depths of the human Soul, they may hear a voice pro- 
 claiming, I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. 
 
 18 
 
274 Evolution versus Involution. 
 
 Appendix. 
 
 [The folloiving was intended as a foot-note, and should have been introduced as 
 a further exposition of the fourth Atheistical proposition considered in the last 
 chapter.'] 
 
 The Atomic theory has always been regarded as the stronghold 
 of Materialism, (disbelief in the existence of everything which is 
 not what we call Matter,) yet, strange as it may seem to many, 
 Materialism and belief in the existence of Atoms are mutually de- 
 structive. 
 
 An Uncaused thing can have no compulsory relation to any other 
 Uncaused thing — must he unconditioned. Any relation which it 
 might have to another Uncaused thing must spring from within 
 itself uninfluenced by anything outside of it — must be the result of 
 Free volition. 
 
 On the supposition, then, that there are such things as Atoms, 
 and that they are Uncaused, and, therefore, Unconditioned, it is 
 obvious that the mutual reaction existing among them cannot be 
 the result of Necessity or Compulsion, but of Spontaneous con- 
 scious activity ; for, were such interaction induced by Compulsion, 
 then the premises with which we started as a necessary postulate 
 of an Uncaused thing would be violated and rendered nugatory. 
 The Materialist, therefore, who regards the Atoms as Uncaused, 
 (and to be a Materialist he must so regard them,) and still denies 
 self-consciousness and freedom to each, is guilty of a contradiction, 
 for he takes away from the Atom, by this very denial, its Uncon- 
 ditioned and Uncaused nature. 
 
 If, setting at defiance all reason, he maintain that the Atom does 
 possess self-consciousness and freedom, then he multiplies the mys- 
 tery of the Universe in the same measure that indefinite multitude 
 is greater than Unity. Instead of One God, he would have an in- 
 definite multitude of Gods. 
 
 The Materialist, then, is reduced to the necessity of denying the 
 Existence of Atoms, and to look upon the Universe as a continu- 
 
Appendix. 275 
 
 ous unbroken mass of Matter. But this necessarily involves the 
 denial of the existence of Space. And here the Materialist is met 
 by the incontrovertible facts of Universal Experience. He cannot 
 shut his eyes to the truth that what he calls Matter is denser in 
 some places than in others ; that, for instance, a cubic inch of iron 
 contains more Matter than a cubic inch of air. But if he acknowl- 
 edge this, and acknowledge it he must, then perforce he must 
 likewise acknowledge that Space (which may be defined as the 
 absence of what we call Matter) does exist. But if Space exists, 
 the Universe cannot be continuous Matter, and what we call Matter 
 must, therefore, be conceived of as consisting of infinitesimal par 
 tides (Atoms) separated from one another by Space ; and to such 
 particles, as already shown, an Unconditioned nature cannot be as- 
 signed. 
 
 An Uncaused, Unconditioned limited thing is a contradiction. 
 
 The Atoms, therefore, cannot be Uncaused, and Materialism is 
 an absurdity. 
 


 
 
 
 -VvY7 ■ 
 
 ^M 
 
 ■ 
 
 ■ * 
 
 > .