The Herald of Wales. — 1888-03-17 (Swansea, West Glamorgan, Wales)

TWO RANNINOB ON DARWIN. TO THE EDITOR  will, I am sure, interest many of your readers to see what different estimate, have been formed of the philosophimil capacity' of Darwin by two such critics as lifr Manning (the Unita, tan ministar of Swansea) and Cardinal Manning (the Catholic Arohhiehop of Weatminsher.) In his first lecture on "Darwin'. Orkin of fipeoles," thus spoke Mr Manning:—" Darwin built up his theory of thaorigin of species us the old feudal sovereigns built up their power. As they e,.• • .".•ted their power by enlisting the help many independent nobles, so he built up his theory by e mitolidarating innumerable facts into one grand generalization, Hi patience and energy were marvelmus. If genius be infinite capacity for taking pains, Darwin was a genius of the Wheat order. lie took: his stand beside Copernicus, Newton, Laplace, and Deeeartes." In a paper read before the Catholie /toad, mis on Darwin and his philosophical speculations, his Eminence is reported to have :pressed the follow ng judgment :—His Eminence then went on to quote Mr Darwin's retsonal ss.timents, which proved him to het, been a good son and a good brother, and ti' have exercised to his neighbours the duties of ' good feeling in quite an ex leptional degree. Hie religious be ief waa at first theistic, but rot time went on this degenerated into agnosticism. To account ;for this sad deterioration his syetem ot thought must be studied, end from thence it appeared that Mr Darwin', mind became more and more dwarfed into a habit and faculty of observation. His higher faculties of mind became starved and stunted and almost extiurrnished, so that in the end he lost the true philosophical habit, and he be. came—what he might call—a living microscope of great and unrivalled po ver, but absolutely incapable of wide or solid generalization. Hid Etninence quoted passages in euppert of these couchiai ins, and showed that Ifr Darwin was eingularly ineonaisent, belied his own principles, and refused to carry then out to their only true and legitimate conclusion." Criticising Darwin's theory of the evolution of:man, time, on another occasion, wrote the Contras!, " There are, indeed, many daring hypotheses, but there are no facts of science rendering the evolution of min from a lowe: animal credible or probable. I will here confine myself to this one point. Tha argument may he stated thus: Comparing the structure of Mau with the structure of the ape, fibil :4 group of sin•ilitudee M the form and organization of the bone,. From this it is interred that the anthropoid ape is germinal man, and that man is the anthropoid ape made prfict. But, where are the gradations of transition. Let it be said that a group of similitudes between the corporeal or bony  etructuree of the ape, and ei tlie man may tie found; multiply and raise its details as much as you will. If there stands alone, one only grotip of similitudes ; and those similitudes are found in the lowest region of man's nature. On the other hand, there are five groups of dissimilitudes between the ape and the man; and these arc in the highest region of man's nature, to which no counterpart can be found it the ape. If then one group of similitude, refers man to the ape, five groups of dissimilitudes sever man from the ape." The five groups are the following: late language; 2, power of abstract thought; 3, 1 power of intellectual creation; 4, moral reason; 3, power of self-government, and consoionsnees of responsibility. His eminence continues ii'These five groups of dissimilitudee aro, indend no less patent than the one group of similitudes in our bodies and bone,. Disputants may shut their eyes to them, but the human race sees theta. They were dropped from no planet ; they were not self caused by spontaneous generation. An induction which takes in only one group of the lowest phenomena, and excludes five of the highest, is neither be-tontine nor philosophical,  but an outrage on philosophy, science, and oommon sense. Some men, however, would rather commit intellectual suicide than acknowledge their Maker." Without any question as to the competrai • competency of these two prities, I leave your readers t form their own conclusions as to the permanent value, and establi.hod certainty which will be given to parwiti's theories by futu, e men of scienee.—l am respeotfully, I yours A. P.