pdf 25 MB - BSBI Archive

BRITISH ASSOCIATION, MEETING AT EXETER. 289
found affinity of tlie higher creatures. The purpose of this affinity was
to be found in the glory of God. The cherubim, the foiu- typical
creatures, ceased not, they were told, to give their Creator glory. Who
could say there was no power in the lower animals, conscientiously it
miglit be, also, to glorify God ? If any one said this was a mysterious
mode of treating the subject, what, he asked, could they have but
mystery? The more mysterious the answer, the more likely it was to
be true. Mr. Darwin's theory referred natural imiformity to a uni-
versal parentage, his to a universal pattern. Natural selection, under
the latter, would still have its proper place. Dr. Darwin's view as to
the origin of species was not necessarily irreligious, but his own facts
upset it, showing that there was a special divine superintendence of the
organic world." The Archdeacon in no way impugned the well-earned
reputation of Mr. Darwin as an observer.
" Tlie Difficulties of Darwinism." By the Eev. H. O. Morris. lu
this paper it was contended that Mr. Darwin, in his book on the
' Variation of Species,' was guilty of a non seqnitur,— his argument
being that because many mere varieties had their origin in one common
ancestor, all species were to be thus accounted for. Mr. Morris
held that there was abundant evidence that when left to themselves,
cultivated varieties of animals and plants returned to the original forai,
which if they had not been cultivated, they would not have lost. Mr.
Darwin had never proved the creation of a new species. A number of
quotations were made militating against the idea that man had arisen
from a state of barbarism to one of civilization, and favoiuing the
opposite theory that savage tribes were the product of degradations.
'•''
Philosophical Objection to Dancinism, or Evolutionism." By the
Kev. Dr. M'Caun. The author urged that belief in evolutionism
meant materialism, and the denial of the soul and immortality,—nay,
even atheism. This he held to be proved by the writings of Professor
Huxlev. Philosophy had a right to be heard on this subject, not only
on account of its importance, bu-t because of the uncertainties of science.
Dr. M'Cann then proceeded to assert his position ; w^hich was, that
the affirmations of consciousness were unquestionable, and that any-
thina: that contradicted an affirmation of consciousness was false.
Evolutionism did contradict many of these affirmations, and was therefore
false. Evolutionism also denied responsibility and morality. He
argued further, that the continuance of the non-selected forms, with