The Herald of Wales. — 1888-03-24 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

TWO MANNING ON DARWINISM."  lIDITOR.  Sir,—lt is hardly to be expected that a priest of the Roman Catholic Church would agree with the eonclnsions arrived at by Darwin. Coneistent with Its old poliey, the Caurch will try to abut out the light to the last. But it is curious that Cardinal Manning should Rick out the most nodoubted facts of Darwinism to oriticize. He is like a man standing before a blazing e...• had assJrting that it is a poor effete, with heat. He lays that Darwin was ncpble of great generalisations, and we are t,,:a tat he quoted extracts in support of his asee, i‘,1.4. I shonld very innoli like to know what se :extracts were. Darwin made no claim to infallibility. and, of alum, it lignite possible that some of his conclusions may be wrong. But to say that he was incapable of forming generalize.. hIAB is to ignore the great work of his life. hat is his "Origin of Spooks what hie "Descent of Man?' If they are not great generalizations they are nothing at all. He gives ample facts to support his conclusions. e spent the beat part of his life in verifying the facts on which he relies; but what are these facts but the pillars on which ho built up a grand generalization? It ill 'simply an abuse ot truth to deny it. Canon Wilson quotes Cardinal Manning se an authority against the Darwinian theory. But what is his word against that of the long array of scientific men who have adopted his couclusions and regard them as a now truth horn into the world ? Fiske hays (and his :opinion on the subject is worth for more than the Cardinal's), "Among tinkers of the first order of originality, baiwin has been peculiarly fortunate in having lived to see all the fresh and powerful minds of anew generation adopting hie fundamental conceptions, and pursuing their inquiries along the path which he was the first to break." Professor blersh'is investigations into the paleontology of the horse have proved beyond all question that, so far WI the genus Equir is concerned, Darwin's theory of the origin of species is an undeniable truth. With regard to the Cardinal's second statement, one of two things is clear: either (i.) he is unsquoteii, or (ii.) he has not read Darwin, and forms his judgment from hearsay and pre; udice, and has, therefore, no right to vest. Darwin nowhere says that "the anthropoid ape is germinal man, and that man is the anthropoid ape made perfect." Ihie is an interesting specimen of the dense ignorance that prevails as to what Darwin really means. an who will not take the trouble to real him, presume to judge him, and so deceive themselves and mislead others. Darwin cerainly never made any such assertion never could make it, any more than he could assert that the am le germinal horse, and that the horse is ass mad, perfect. What he does say is that the anthropoid ape and man belong to the same speciee, descended from a common progenitor far off in the wilds of the early world. It would be well for the modern world if dignitaries of the Roman Church would take the trouble to understand men of science before they proceed to denounce them. Darwin distinctly says, ( Descent p. 155, 2nd Edit. ), "We must not fall into the error of supposing that the early progenitor of the whole Simian stock, ineludiug man, was identical with, or even closely resembled any existing ape or monkey." - • As to the "dissimilitude." (disimilarities ?) between ape and man Darwin would, I think, recognize the Err at difference/ in their degree and even in their quality. But he has shown conclusively that the rudiments of all these things may be seen in other animals besides man, and that the nearer man approaches the savage state the less is the interval between them. It woe not his purpose to point out the immense difference in the direction of natural development which these superior powers gave to man—no longer that of new zoological species, but of the intelleatird and moral development of society. But all this is Involved in the Darwin theory, as I tried to show in my lecture. The Cardinal's parting shot falls wide of the mark. Darwin never committed intellectual suicide, and he never denied his Maker. All that he denies is that mania a 'special creation' fresh and perfect from the hands of the Creator. Yours, etc., J. E.