Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-07-03

and watches the slow transition of in
dividusl peculiarities into more or lie, s
permanent varieties: so long as he ex-
hibiis the changes that take place be-
fore our very ewes lay
means OF artificial breeding, IS
in the case Of pigeons; so long as he
shows that many of the numberless
so-cSlled species among plants or ami
mails share all that is essential in COM
mon and differ by accidental peculi-
arities only; 50 long SIS he traces living
species back TO extinct species, the re-
mains of which have been preserved
10 US in tie geological archives of our
globe; so long. in fact, a. he goes
backward, step by step. and opens 10 US
page after page, in the forgotten book
OF life, he Is one of the greatest and
most successful Representatives of the
historical school. But when his love
of systematic uniformity leads hi i'm 10
postulste four beginnings for the
whole realm of organic life. thongh
not yet one, like his followers: when
he begins 10 sketch possible genoa
logical tree Of all generations OF living
biengs, though not yet with
THE HERALDIC NISJ-rESPss
of his pupil, Prof Haeckel: when he
argues that because natural selection
can account for certSin very pSlpsble
chsnges, a. between the wolf snd the
spaniel, ii may also account for les
palp4ble differences. - 20 the ape and
the man, though no rezl man ofse;eucs
would venture 20 argue in tina. way:
when, in fact, he zlEoz. his hopes 10
get the better CT his .zArs. he h--s9r,ats
a follower and : rery powerful! s1r-
porter Of The the0r=zse school.
IL may Be tide yery continuation Of
these TAO Characters which explains
the enormous Influence which D.r-
wins theories have exercised on the
present generation f: but, If so. We shsIl
zee in the com bination the germs of a
new sehism also, aud the conditions
Of further growth. Great as
was DaEvin's conscientionsnes..
We cannot deny that occasion.
ally his enthusiasm. or his Logical
Convictions, led him to Judge Of things
that man was gene .OlOgiezily descend
cd from an animal. That was as Vel
merely q theoretical conviction. as ali
honest Zoologists-I shsll not mention
Prof Nirchow-now fully admit As
language hAs been pointed our a. a
rub!oon which no beast had ever
crossed,
DARWIN LENT A WILLING EAR
10 those who think that they can de.
rive language, that is real loyos. from
lnterectiops and mimicry, by n
process OF spontaneous evolution. and
produced himself some most per.
suasiye arguments. We know Inv
aoie, now persuasive pleader
Darwin could be when he
wished to show how man eonId
have descended from an sni.
NAL which was born hairy and r..
msined so during life; he. could moi
Wen maintain that an animal without
hair was filter to survive than an ami.
MAJ with hair. He therefore wished
US to believe that our female san,t.
human progenitors lost their hair hv
a a,'l Were, as Hermann said, Mi
nus heiiuine facie ct indole.' and
that in the process of ssSnsi
se'ecion this partical or com pIera
badness was considered an attraction
and was thus perpetuated from n,n,ba,
TO son. 1t WAS difficult no dcnh, %
give up Millions Eve for semi.hnman
pIogenit1r suffering 1t may be from lep-
niosy OF inecoderms, yet Darwin, like
~ ~ ~ MeImann, nearly persuaded
US 70 DO so. However, in Defending 40
hopeless, orat all eytnts, SO unfortified a
position as the transition Of the cries
oa animais into the language OF man
naen SO great general Us Darwin
may say without presumption, that to |
speak OF no other barrier between man
and beast, the barrier of language Re-
mains as mistaken as ever, and rem. |
aes every attempt at deriving man
esnealogieally from any known or I'M.
,pown ape, for the present at least
! possible, or, at all events, unscien,