Nantwich, Sandbach & Crewe Star — 1891-06-12 ()

CHAS. LEWIS.  To the Editor of the _Crewe Star.  SIR,—In the correspondence last week on the above, your correspondent, "J.A. D. quotes a number of extracts from evolutionists, which do not in any way prove the truth of the Biblical record that has been attacked, end he finishes off by writing "not proven" across Mr. Lewis' paragraph. Now, a great question such as this can only be dec'aei by an:appeal to evieence. Evidence is of two kinds—direct and indirect, or circumstantial. In our courts of justice both are admitted. A man sees a murder co.nmitted, and gives direct evidence as to its committal, or the accused is found guilty on purely circumstantial evidence. In favour of the origin of species, as special creations, there is no evidence whatever. In fact, this view of the special creation of certain distinct kinds of animals or plants by an Almighty power is entirely uu-upported. There is not p single witness of repute on its aide.  Of indirect facts in favour of the hypothesis of Darwin, there is no end. Some attempt has been made by him, and by those that follow him, to group the facts. Whilst we begin by saying that every fact that has been observed has been on the side of the modern view, we may remind ourselves that the E,,.eat principle of the conservation of energy, now so firmly established, is violated by an act of special creation, is in harmony wall the idea of the evolution of species; that our systems of classification with their overlapping and dovetailing of individual groups, are upon the one theory only the expression of an arbitrary and aimless act of will on the other, a genealogical tree of all living things : that the special creation theory affords no satisfactory explanation of the appearance of the simpler forms of living things in the earlier and in the older rocks, followed by the appearance of more complex ones ; as the more recent rocks are studied, whilst this progressive advanee in organisation is to be expected by the evolutionist ; that the distribution of living things on the surface of the earth at the present day is explicable only on the scientific view; that the facts of the anatomy of plants and animals are in harmony with, and are full of significance, on the theory of Darwin; that such facts as the rudimentary organs, and the cases of homology, or likeness of structure without necessarily analogy or likeness of function, are meaningleqs on any other theory than th;s ; that the deveopment of a living being from the simplest conditions through more and more complex ones, until the fiF.al condiCon for the plant or animal is attained, appears to be an epitome of the ancestral history of the living being, and is in dirtct contradiction to the special creation hypothesis; that this great induction as to the origin of species, an induction from innumerable facts is found not to fail whenever it is applied practically, that in short, reasoning on it, certain phenotaena are expected, and these phenomena are actually found. When we reflect on all this it is impossible for anyone who ' deals with these questions in the true scientific spirit to hesitate for a moment which of the two theories is more likely to be true.-1 ara,