Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-03-18


clerical mind, it is in no way wonderful, for /
to scientific readers it is so clearly irrelevant |
and inconclusive as to be undeserving of |
serious refutation. Those who are engaged in !
scientific research cannot pretermit their en- |
crossing and important studies in order to con- |
tistical sciolist who thinks he has found
flaws in their argument.
In the meantime Hall has his peculiar field
to himself, and can demolish the cham
pions of Evolution with the utmos. ease.
He possesses certain fiuency of style, and
his arrogance is so enormous as to make parts
of his works rather amusing reading. A
dozen times in a page he claims to have
demonstrated "the infinite flllacy of the
current theory" the :" disastrous self. contra
dictions," of his miserable adversaries, the
utter overthrow of Evolution, the
confusion " into which his tremendous argu-
ments have thrown Haeckel and Tyndsl
and the rest, and the glorious snd splendid
manner in which be has established his own
side of the case. In fact this kind of self
laudation is so profusely INDUCED, and ia so
fulsome, that we are led sometimes to doubt
whether the author does not really belong in
the Guiteau category. La recent paper on
reasoning insanity" indeed, DR.. Ham
mond of New York sketched kind of
lunstic whose most prominent character
istie, he sayP, sis an oyerbearing egoti5m,
which shows itself On all occasions He
further observes that "the egotism of these
people is unmarked by the least trace
of modesty in obtruding themselves and
their avowed good qualities upon the
public at every opportunity. They boast
of their genius, their righteousness, their
goodness of heart. their high sense of
honor, their learning and other qualities
and requirements, and this when they are
perfectly aware that they are commonplace,
'irreligious, cruel and vindictiYe, utterly
devoid of any chivalrous feeling, and
saturated with ignorance"
We do net mean to imply that Mr.. Hall is
all the bad things recited by DR.. Hammond
but it is impossible to deny that man who,
without scientific training, apparently ignor-
ant of all languages but his own, in the
absence of experimental research, and upon
no better foundation than preconceived
notion, itself based upon superstition of the
grossest kind, undertakes deliberately to
overthrow the hypothesis which years of labor
ious and extended research in all the domain
OF science have fortified and established. and
which now rests upon an immense mass of
the most clearly verified phenomena, is much
more likely to be presumptuOus aud per-
haps not quite sane egotist, than a heaven
sent genius and the teacher of his age. To
those who, from the laxity of their in
tellectual training. are unable to distinguish
between solid and sham Arguments, The
Problem of Lie il quite likely to appear
powerful work. Just so the village school
very Solomon to the still more ignorant rus.
tics Of his neighberhood. But the real value
of the book must be appraised by higher
order of intelligence, and the estimate at
which it will finally be placed has in fact al
| ready been made.
| OF course we have not the space to exam.
inc the authors mock arguments in detail,
even did we consider the game worth the
candle, but in order to prove to our readers
that we have not overstated his presumption
and his ignorance, we will take single spe-
eimen of his work, and analyze it little.
| Among the arguments for Evolution drawn
from Embryology considerable stress has
been laid by Haeckel and others upon the
appearance in the human embryo, at an early
stage of its development, of series of fssures
at each side of the head resembling in all
respects the rudimenta,y gills of the fish.
This phenomenon is made use of to support
the conclusion that the human embryo passes
through the several stages of development be.
| tween the simple cell and the mammal, dur
| ing CESSATION, thus marking the steps by
which the human race has been evolved from
the moneron. Mr.. MILFORD Hall, in his
| ferocious assault upon Haeekel, falls tooth
and nail upon this gill phenomenon, and
actually denies the fact of its occurrence,
basing this denial, not upon experimental
research in enbryology, not upon any knowl-
edge of anatomy or physiology, but upon an
examination of the photographic plates pub
lished in an English translation of Hseckers
work ! To US, and, we venture to think, to
every sober and clear minded person,
such an example is conclusive. Here
is writer who is so grossly
| ignorant of embryology as not to know that
ha ~ he III
pharyngeal arches to the gills of fish is
completely established physiological fact !;
and whose methods are so hopelessly and
utterly unscienti6c that he undertakes to
refute the statements of one of the most
thorough experimental embryologists living,
by an argument based upon the appearance
of rough drawing of an embryo! Had he
looked into any standard work on physiol.
ogy he would have been saved from such a
blunder. For instance, if he had opened
Carpenter he would have found it stated
that 1.-THE aorta subdivides on either side of
the neck into four or FIVE arches, which
"are separated by fssures much re.
"sembling these forming the entrances TO
the gill-cavities of cartilsginous fishes"
Gray's Anatomy would have given him the
same information, and, in fact, any text.
book. But instead of ascertaining the facts
before presuming to discuss the question,
this rash and reckless isnoramus plunges
headlong into the most preposterous all
surdities, and in the teeth of all the authori-
ties gravely argues, upon the strength of his
conception of plate in a book, that the
pharyngeal arches are not assures at all,
but merely folds of the skim" 1t is by
arguments of this character and consistency
that ne has sought to overthrow the evolu-
tionary hypothesis. and though we have con-
sidered it quite sufficient to adduce this one
glazing instance of his folly and audacity,
IVA can assura oJIr readers that bis honlx iS q