The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1874-02-24
The Evolution Theory Further Con.
l.. Sidered.
Rditorh of TIM Inta,Nsanea,,

Rditorh Of tho Intelhgeneet:
II iS much to be regretted that YOU
correspondent "Anthfopos" lost his TEN
per In reading the letter Of "An Evolu
ZIONIST" for had he not done 80 we nigh
have had arguments instead Of abuse.
Anthropos" takes exception TO the at
tack on the clergy In such q way that ont
would imagine clergyman had beer
hurt; the TACT is, however, the word the
ologians was used, which certainly EN-
braces the clergy but 10 not limited tc
that class.
Rightly or wrongly theologians have
been looked UPON as teachers by laymen
generally, and are still, to O great extent
and II Is therefore expected, that any dis.
covery affecting the origin Of man, the
world. or probable future conditions,
should be fairly examined by them with
o view TO bring out the truth; and the
matter oi preference as TO any particular
theory should have nothing 10 do with It.
It will be said, first, that this Is already
done; and secondly, that such ideas con-
tict with the Bible, tho inspired word oi
God. In answer to the first, l would say
that the clergy are generally accused Of
avoiding the subject, but when they are
forced to confront scientific Ideas,
1t is done in an utterly uu:
scientific way, accompanied by
announcements ol the particular scien.
fists concerned. With regard TO the
second point It should be acknowledged at
once that theology rests upon faith sim.
ply, and not upon evidence; q position
which q great many eminent clergymen
are fast taking, and In doing this old theo.
logical superstitions will have to give way
again, as they have done hitherto.
l do not agree with the statement that
"An EVolutionist" admits that the facts to
prove his theory are wanting; the fac Is
are to be found In the writings Of Darwin
and others; but understand "An Eyolu-
tionis" TO say that while the general
principle 10 correct, the details are NOT as
sufficiently known as other and older
theories.
The profound Agassiz," the iayorite
and only scientist Of note on the side Of
special creation, 1t Is well known favored
some years ago the theory ofevolution to
some extent, and 1t Ia known now that
when he wrote his so-called refutation oI
Darwinism his brain was diseased,
which, shortly after, proved the cause oil
his death; but opposed 10 him VIC find
such men as Darwin, Huxley, Spencer,
Lyell, Carpenter, TYndall, Owen, Wal
lace, Broca, Pouchet, Heer, Schaai-
hansen, Vogt, Buchner, Heckel,
Gray, Wyman, and many others.
ch men do not lightly accept
any theory and with regard to the mode
specified by "Anthropos" oi proving theor.
lee; It Is known that Mr.. Darwin spent
twenty years collecting bis facts, besides
using the well established facts Of Others
before generallzing; and an independent
observer, Mr.. Wallace, arrived at the same
conclusion about the same time, I'D.
Theologians have always been the last
TO accept scientific discoveries conflicting
with their theories, and probably always
will be, and while we may have some re.
pugnance to accept the theory Of a des-
cent from lower forms, (from our early
theological instructions), yet upon calm
reflection It will be seen that a much
nobler conception Of the power that Great.
ed all things will arise; that Evolution Is
but another name for progress; that there
Is no such thing in nature as retrogres-
sion; and that the future Of man opens up
Q boundless and much more exalted view
than that which condemns man TO ever
lasting punishment for something his an
cestors did 5000 years ago. = lT}fi -
ANOTHER EvoLUTIoNIsT.