Dodgeville chronicle. [volume] (Dodgeville, Wis.) 1862-current, 1871-05-05
DarWinism.
FROM scR1BNER's MONTHLY.

For some years the discussion of the or
igin of species has been progressing. but
has rather avoided the real centre of inter
est, the question of the origin of man; al
though it has been plainly enough seen
what was the tendency of the arguments,
and that the main battle would be fought
here But within few months the bat
teries have been unmasked and the ques-
ton is squarely discussed. Mr.. A. H.
Wallace, who Independently announced
what he called the great law of Natural
Selection" first came out with an argu-
ment to prove that man was descended
from ape-like progenitors, but that he va
red in so many respects from what might
have been expected, that there were evil
dent proofs that Higher Intelligence had
modified and directed the operations of
natural law. The most important contri-
button, however, to this subject is DaT-
wins long promised Descent Of Man, just
issued by D. Appleton & Co.
He is able to see nothing that cannot be
explained by the laws Of nature, and traces
the probable ancestry OF man through the
monkeys OF the Old World (probably not
the gorilla nor one of the largest species),
then the family of lemurs, then that of the
kangaroos and opossums, then of the Dr.
nithorhynchus which was the son of
reptile, which was the son of fish, which
was the son of an Ascidian mollusk, which
was the son of worm, which was the son
of a coccolith, which was the son of an
amoeba. which was the son of-we don't
know what; specifically, at least, quite a
different genealogy from the biblical one,
ending with "Seth, which was the son of
Alan, which was the son of God" But
the main argument of Darwin-an argu-
ment so much made up of small points
mutually strengthening each other, though
of little weight alone-is the old familiar
one used by biologists generation ago, in
reply to theologians who insisted on their
chronology Of the earth as only six thous-
and years old. They used to say, " Can
it be believed that the God of Truth would
have created the earth with such strata
and fossils as it contains simply to deceive
his creatures with the belief that they had
been gradually deposited, and that all
these animals and plants now extinct once
actually inhabited the earth ? Is the earth
lie ?" This is just the substance of OAR
wins argument. Is it credible that man
can be separate creation when he posses
ses so many rudimentary muscles and 9TH
er organs, and exhibits so many variations,
all perfectly explained in the theory that
they are inherited from an ape-ike ances-
tor, but in any other theory nothing less
than base deception
We have put his argument in its most
striking form. It will doubtless immedi
ately call out host of champions to assail
it's wealth of facts and its conclusions.
Though the younger scientific men have
Ueell dGGidSISt ny IhO hSN eAS0'y !,
the older scholars have held more aloof
and insist that the old opinion, that man was
special creation of God, has other argu-
ments than the generally receiyed exegesls
of Genesis. And it is reassuring to those
who are worried by what seems to them
the ungodly theory of Development, to
find that so many of its ablest defenders,
like Owen, Wallace, and st. George Miv-
art, believe they see abundant proofs that
Higher Power has modified the progress
of development, compelling it to travel in
certain fixed lines, and toward certain de-
sired ends.
Just behind the question, whether one
living species can be developed out of an
other by the ordinary forces of nature, lies
the most vexed question of all: whether
nature will develop living species at all
Out of dead matter. Scientific men, since
Pasteur, have rather avoided the question,
apparently not caring to shock too many
prejudices at once. But it is about time
that the question were met, and few
months ago DR.. Bastian, respectable Eng.