Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1884-10-09
The 4urkrille Guqnirer.
YORKVILLE. s. e. /:
THURSDAY MORNING, OCTOBER 8, 1888
THE EVOLUTION OF ADAM.

THE EVOLUTION OF ADAM.
In the midst of an exciting Presidential
campaign, involving the fate of no less than
five aspirants to that exalted position, and
with the prospect of heated State canvass
before us, a new question on an old subject
has been suddenly evolved by DIR. James
Woodrow, one of the professors in the Co
lumbia Theological Seminary-theq question
being no other than the Evolution of Adam
in other words, taking the literal meaning
of the term, free from all polemic adorn'
ment, "the act of unfolding or unrolling
hence in the process of growth, develop
ment; as the evolution of flower from a
bud, or an animal from an egg"
The learned Doctor takes the decided
ground that Adam was "evolved" from the
lower animals, and he discussed the origin
of man from this paganc standpoint in
lecture or address delivered before the
Alumni Association of the Theological Sem
mary at Columbia, on the 18th of May last,
which address is published in the July
number of the Southern Presbyterian Reriev,
the publication Of the address being at the
request of the Alumni Association, and
s'also at the request Of the Board of Direc-
tors of the Theological Seminary"
On account of the peculiar views embodied
in the address, it has attracted considerable
attention at home and abroad-in Dr. Wood
rows own denomination and in others; and
it is just now becoming the subject of much
comment and discusSiOn-sOme favorable
and some unfavorable-in the Doctors
church.
Although an "off-year" in politics would
have been more opportune for the discussion
of this vital question, yet as it has been
raised, it were better that it be settled def
nitely and as early as possible. Every day
increases the span Of time that has elapsed
since Adams mortal career, and while he is
not here to answer for himself-a certain
school of philosophers acting upon the as
sumption that his origin must be accounted
for on a theory of anthropology peculiarly
their own-it is no less to be regretted that
he left an unenviable record to posterity.
We do not propose to discuss the ques-
ton, however, in it's metaphysical and
biological bearing, this having been done
at stated intervals ever since the day OF
Aristotle by eminent philosophers who
seem to have become fully satisfied in their
own minds that they understand the plan OF
creation equally as we'll as did the Creator
and commencing with Aristotle, we have
the theory that in the higher animals at
any rate the formation Of the new organism
by the process of generation takes place,
not suddenly, by simultaneous accretion OF
rudiments of all or the most important OF
the organs of the adult; nor by sudden
metamorphosis ola formative substance into
miniature of the whole, which subsequent
ly grows; but by successive difterentia-
ton of a relatively homogeneous rudiment
into the parts and structures which are
characteristic of the adult. AS far back as the
seventeenth century the famous DR.. Harvey,
who was also biological writer, defended
this hypothesis, which was c0ntroverted by
Malpighi, who went upon the general ground
that the body of the chick is to be seen in
the egg before the panct,m sangui'ae'tna
makes its appearance. But though NAL
pighi's views were warmly welcomed, on
philosophical grounds, by the psychologists
of the day, Harvey exploded them by
simply affirming that the chick as a whole
really exists in the egg antecedently to in
cubation; and that what happens in the
course of the latter process is no addition of
new parts. Then Bonnet took up the sub
iect. He said that revolution" and "devel-
opment" are synonymous terms, and he also
defended Malpighi's theory that before
formulation the hens egg contains an ex-
| nj; ;o1- p,,Hn hnl
the same view and the notion that all the
kinds of animalsand plants may have come
into existence by the growth and moditica-
ton of primordal germs was entertained
and enunciated by other eminent philoso-
pliers. In the 18th century Descartes held
that the physical world and all things in it,
whether living or not living, have origi-
mated by process of evolution, due to the
continuous operation ofpurely physical caus-
es out of primitive relative tirmless mat
ter. Similar views were entertained by a
host of speculative writer's in the 18th and
18th centuries; and in more modern days
we have the theory of Mr.. Darwin, who en-
larges upon all the vagaries Of those who
preceded him "in accounting for the evo-
luton of the higher organic forms out of the
lower;" the doctrine of Herbert Spencer,
who elaborates Il philosophy OF evolution
on a scientific basis; Professor Clifford, who
starting from the basis of empirical ideal
ism, asserts that material objects are moth
ing but states of consciousness, and argues
that the reality answering to them is in all
cases something mental. His theory is a
monistic and quasi-spiritualistic conception
ofevolution. Then we have the writings of
Mr.. G.. H. Lewes, who adopts view of the
relation of mind and life or organization
closely resembling in its essentials that of
Mr.. Spencer. Professor Huxley, also, in
accounting for the appearance of man upon
this mundane sphere, after comparing the
human being with order after order Of the
mammalia, decides, '"There would remain
then but one order for comparison, that of
the Apes, (using that word in its broadest
sense,) and the question for discussion would
narrow itself to this-is man SO differ
ent from any of these apes chat he must
form an order by himself?" And now as
the latest contribution to this vexed ques-
tion-which, from the list of authors we
have quoted, it may be seen that it has
engaged the attention of many eminent
minds-we have the address of DIR. Wood
row. He treats of evolution, "as it respects
the world, the lower animals and man."
In Justice to DR.. Woodrow, it may be
said that he does not altogether ignore
divine authority, as do nearly all the
writer's on evolution who have preceded
him but from this source he says, what