Year: 1873

sign, and then draw his conclusion as tt


Clarke's false deduction. Please my


friendly resoluters, read few lines il


"The Reason Why" of Natural History


before you commend "him, q. w Clarke,


and his course of lectures to the attention


of all lovers of science and intellectual


culture "


1t will take bigger fish story than any
cited to us on the evening of February


9th, to show much similarity in design or


use. According to j. W. Clarke's teach,


ng, the cot uplet POSSIBLY older thai he


from whom the gentleman takes his CUE
as the monkey story is older) fitly rep
resents the monkey saying of his descend
ants:


"AH these are ours, and with pleasure see,


Man strutting on two legs and qpeing me-"
[DRYDEN.l
As was called in question for not choos
ing to endorse the social teachings of J..
w. Clarke so far as heard them,I submit
one ol his deductions made in the presence
offriends as sufficient reason, at least to my
mind, why I could not. On the occasion
allude to, it was remarked that there
was strange transformation from the
tadpoIe to the frog. The Professor took
up the subject, and said: THAT is not
strange at all. In the embryo, we are
/ nothing but tails. At later period moth
but but head and tail as the reptile, and
we are all born with tails" | asked: Do
you think any physician or naturalist,
will endorse your statement. He answer
ed | think the naturalist will 1t was
asked Scan there be a tail without ver-
tebra?" Has anything ever been seen in
earth, air or sky of this kind? Do you
with aid of evolution, can produce such
thing? He answered they might Who
does not see this strange mixing of "cere-
bral, cranium tail brain power" Eoolu
ton, from monkey to man, leads to un-
commendable conclusion Again: could
not endorse the theory of a larger crani-
un as evidence of advanced intelligence
as to man and the lower animals.


The Professor affirmed socially, and in
his lectures, that the Uranium was the
evidence of soul and brain power, and this
was evolution. His argument in the last
lecture, was: Now | will refer evolution
to brain power For the first time, we
detect it in the tertiaries The brain power
of the mammals are very much superior in
the tertiaries We know it from the era
MUM. Then, on to the present, increase
of brain power in evolution in every decade.
The brain power of Europe, was not once
what it is to day"


Why not endorse all of this? Let any
one ask Webster what is meant by de-
cade, and take some of the past decades
and ask, understandingly the question.
Whether the brain power of to day is su-
perior to some decades of the past. Then
remember, it is tue, that the first, or ear
liest ''human skull geology has found,
was that Of u aoeH deoeLoped man"


Further note, that "the zoon is the low
est part of man" That the blunders Pro
fessor Clarke makes in quoting Huxley
and Darwin, and endorsing them, consists
in confounding the basis of life, with life
ITSELF The Professor with his teachers,
have no positive definitioniof life. Is not
the basis ''only condition of the mani
festation of life ?" The conductor is only
the basis of the manifestation OF electrici
ty. The S'little jelly" Clarke speaks of, is
but the bioplasm in which life exists, and
is not lite itself The phenomena of lite
cannot be chemically explained. How
were the microscopic forms to which he
called our attention, and which were
scarcely visible animalcular decided to be
alive? He did not tell US there was no
other way of his knowing only by move
ments, and volitions, as in animal and in
sect life, with which we are familiar
Manifested volition is the only test to the
materialist, and they who pretend to be SO
enthusiastic in the promotion of natural
knowledge as opposed to supernatural"
are very careful who they treat with de-
cency-when they have the least inkling
that we are awake with questions IN the
a1uioerse Of mind that ooerlies that of mat
ter, and are equally alive to the nature of
natural creation with themselves.


Another reason why cannot endorse
the Professor, and would not vote for the
resolution.


By the concession of materialists-tha
mind is the result of cerebral structure or
substance-it must follow that there is in
finite superiority in mans brain over that
of the most developed brute. If so, it is
sufficient to silence the rostrum challenge
of Clarke and his adherents, when they
say: "that there is less difference between
the lowest man, and the highest brute;
than between the highest man and the
lowest man." m


/ cannot endorse the combination of