Sacramento daily record-union., 1888-11-17
SOME THOUGHTS tPOy THIS MICH
DISCUSSED THEME.
which Is Wiser, Contemplation OF
Destruction or PerpIexity and
Vexation Over Origin?

seehl the DarWlhlan theory leads TO some
very ludicrous, if not illogical, conclu-
sions. In your columns on Saturday. in
referring to a monograph by Professor
Lester +. Ward, YOU say: ain brief, this
is his showing: That Darwin has shown
US the reason why boars have tusks and
stays antlers, and the peacock gaudy tail
feathers. 1t is because the females choose
mates that possessed these characteristics"
Now, 1t occurs to me that the reverse is
the more logical and reasonable conclusion
to arrive at, that the female chooses her
mate by characteristics, and not that those
characteristics exist by reason of the pre-
ference of the female. 1t is presumed that
the peacock, even if devoid of a tail.
when gaudy tails were the proper
thing, would still find mate, and il
obtains in the human family that
no matter how depraved or degraded.
how stepped in infamy how warped
or distorted in physical structure the hu-
man individual finds ample opportunity
to perpetuate his species. The questions of
natural" selection and the Survival of
the tittest' seem to be an incident or ex-
ception to the principle of generation.
We have no evidence that any animal
has power to grow horn or a tusk where
nature has not provided one Even man,
with his insight into the arcana of nature
has been unable to add one .jot or title or
to take away what nature has done for
him in the way of organs.
The female admires beauty and strength.
and makes her selection accordingly. The
hirsute adornment, which is woman's glory
adds no less an attraction to themale biped,
and yet We see with what fruitless eff
forts the coming man is struggling to over
come the inevitable fate Of premature
badness. How many young men have
we seen struggling with the perversity of
an upper lip which, like Banquo's ghost,
will not down. How many men would en-
dure handy legs, knock knees or pug noses.
if they could improve on themselves and
thus gain the favor of the ladies-or the
female. But Darwin tells you the animal
creation can do tit can be done by in
breeding. DR.. Holmes says the time to
begin training a child is 200 years before
it is born, in speaking of mental traits:
and presume physical traits can be trans
mitted as we'll But do animals reason
and make these selections to the desired
end, or do boars have tusks and stays
horns because nature made them that
way? Does the giraffe have long neck
because he eats the leaves of trees, or does
he eat the leaves of trees because he has a
long neck-which is the non ssglit,u. |
presume if the giraffe had a short neck he
would be satisfied with the foliage that
grows nearer the ground, as other animals,
and live just as long and die happy
Our food, our clothing, our shelter and
habits, or, as Herbert Spencer would saw,
our environment all have a tendency
to influence our mental and physical quail
tiles. The male of the animal creation is
possessed of more beauty than the female.
The same is the case in the human family.
Subject a woman 10 the same exposures
and hardships that the man endures, and
she would not retain her delicacy and
beauty as well as the man. Female beauty
is of different quality and different de-
gree from male beauty. The average man
at fifty or sixty years of age is at his best
looks The lines in his face are firm and
well-formed. His color is fresh and rosy,
his frosted locks seem a glory on his head,
his frame is full and rounded, and he gives
you an idea of strength and beauty, while
the woman of fifty or sixty is generally at
a disadvantage. But the human family is
lifted above the animal crea-
ton and with the development
of reason all analogy between
the creations must cease at once. As far
back as we can trace the human family
we can find no intermediate link. If man
ever did descend or ascend from lower
order of creation, his advent was such
radical and abrupt change that we may as
we'll admit at once that he was special
creation 1t seems absurd, to me, to say
that the necessities of man cause the de-
velopment of organs or the disuse of an
organ causes its disappearance. We
read that man originally had tail
but disuse caused it to wither away
and disappear, and that the nose is
on the decline and must go. The earliest
representation we have of the
African slave among the Egyptians,
2,700 years before Christ, gives the
fiat nose and the thick lip just as we see
them to-day If necessity for an orga
would cause it to grow, no doubt great
many people, especially the school marms
would find an eye in the back of the head
invaluable and would be glad to cultivate
II, Uut We nave uO iusttuCC Ou iScoiu VI
nature ever having produced freak, with
all her pranks, of such a character.
If The thumb had been left off of the
human hand we presume a great many
inventions that now bless and give COM
fort to the human family would never have
been thought Of 1t was not the necessity
of the invention that caused the thumb to
grow. But the facility with which the
thumb could be used, that caused mans
wits to work, and the invention to grow.
We presume the shark eats fish because he
has teeth, and the whale infusoria because
he has none If the whale took notion
to fish do you suppose nature would sup
ply him with teeth. Not having the teeth
he knows nothing of fish diet and gets
along Just as well in his own sphere, as he
has done since the creation of the first
whale.
In another column of your valuable
paper was an article from the Popular Sci
ence Monthly on What Evolution is Not"
which accords with my views on the sub
ject. There is a great deal of scientific
speculation circulating in the journals of
the day which passes for erudition, and
much of it is ingenious in its conception,
but perhaps, after all, we would all be
happier and better satisfied with our lot
in life if we would leave these speculations
to the savants who originate them and go
on living and loving, with more thought
for our destination than for our origin.
J. c. MEDLEY.