Chapter 51

The law of continuity here spoken of, as not being violated by occasional exceptions, or by leaps from one creature to another, is not the law of variation and natural selection above explained (Chapter 21), but that unity of plan supposed to exist in the Divine Mind, whether realised or not materially and in the visible creation, of which the "links do not pass by an easy transition" the one into the other, at least as beheld by us.

Dr. Asa Gray, an eminent American botanist, to whom we are indebted for a philosophical essay of great merit on the "Origin of Species by Variation and Natural Selection," has well observed, when speaking of the axiom of Leibnitz, "Natura non agit saltatim," that nature secures her ends and makes her distinctions, on the whole, manifest and real, but without any important breaks or long leaps. "We need not wonder that gradations between species and varieties should occur, or that genera and other groups should not be absolutely limited, though they are represented to be so in our systems. The classifications of the naturalist define abruptly where nature more or less blends. Our systems are nothing if not definite."

The same writer reminds us that "plants and animals are so different, that the difficulty of the ordinary observer would be to find points of comparison, whereas, with the naturalist, it is all the other way. All the broad differences vanish one by one as we approach the lower confines of the animal and vegetable kingdoms, and no absolute distinction whatever is now known between them."*

(* Gray, "Natural Selection not inconsistent with Natural Theology" Trubner & Co. London 1861 page 55.)

The author of an elaborate review of Darwin's "Origin of Species," himself an accomplished geologist, declares that if we embrace the doctrine of the continuous variation of all organic forms from the lowest to the highest, including Man as the last link in the chain of being, there must have been a transition from the instinct of the brute to the noble mind of Man; and in that case, "where," he asks, "are the missing links, and at what point of his progressive improvement did Man acquire the spiritual part of his being, and become endowed with the awful attribute of immortality?"*

(* Physical Theories of the Phenomena of Life "Fraser's Magazine" July 1860 page 88.)

Before we raise objections of this kind to a scientific hypothesis, it would be well to pause and inquire whether there are no analogous enigmas in the constitution of the world around us, some of which present even greater difficulties than that here stated. When we contemplate, for example, the many hundred millions of human beings who now people the earth, we behold thousands who are doomed to helpless imbecility, and we may trace an insensible gradation between them and the half-witted, and from these again to individuals of perfect understanding, so that tens of thousands must have existed in the course of ages, who in their moral and intellectual condition, have exhibited a passage from the irrational to the rational, or from the irresponsible to the responsible. Moreover we may infer from the returns of the Registrar General of births and deaths in Great Britain, and from Quetelet's statistics of Belgium, that one-fourth of the human race die in early infancy, nearly one-tenth before they are a month old; so that we may safely affirm that millions perish on the earth in every century, in the first few hours of their existence. To assign to such individuals their appropriate psychological place in the creation is one of the unprofitable themes on which theologians and metaphysicians have expended much ingenious speculation.

The philosopher, without ignoring these difficulties, does not allow them to disturb his conviction that "whatever is, is right," nor do they check his hopes and aspirations in regard to the high destiny of his species; but he also feels that it is not for one who is so often confounded by the painful realities of the present, to test the probability of theories respecting the past, by their agreement or want of agreement with some ideal of a perfect universe which those who are opposed to opinions may have pictured to themselves.

We may also demur to the assumption that the hypothesis of variation and natural selection obliges us to assume that there was an absolutely insensible passage from the highest intelligence of the inferior animals to the improvable reason of Man. The birth of an individual of transcendent genius, of parents who have never displayed any intellectual capacity above the average standard of their age or race, is a phenomenon not to be lost sight of, when we are conjecturing whether the successive steps in advance by which a progressive scheme has been developed may not admit of occasional strides, constituting breaks in an otherwise continuous series of psychical changes.

The inventors of useful arts, the poets and prophets of the early stages of a nation's growth, the promulgators of new systems of religion, ethics, and philosophy, or of new codes of laws, have often been looked upon as messengers from Heaven, and after their death have had divine honours paid to them, while fabulous tales have been told of the prodigies which accompanied their birth. Nor can we wonder that such notions have prevailed when we consider what important revolutions in the moral and intellectual world such leading spirits have brought about; and when we reflect that mental as well as physical attributes are transmissible by inheritance, so that we may possibly discern in such leaps the origin of the superiority of certain races of mankind. In our own time the occasional appearance of such extraordinary mental powers may be attributed to atavism; but there must have been a beginning to the series of such rare and anomalous events. If, in conformity with the theory of progression, we believe mankind to have risen slowly from a rude and humble starting point, such leaps may have successively introduced not only higher and higher forms and grades of intellect, but at a much remoter period may have cleared at one bound the space which separated the highest stage of the unprogressive intelligence of the inferior animals from the first and lowest form of improvable reason manifested by Man.

To say that such leaps constitute no interruption to the ordinary course of nature is more than we are warranted in affirming. In the case of the occasional birth of an individual of superior genius there is certainly no break in the regular genealogical succession; and when all the mists of mythological fiction are dispelled by historical criticism, when it is acknowledged that the earth did not tremble at the nativity of the gifted infant and that the face of heaven was not full of fiery shapes, still a mighty mystery remains unexplained, and it is the ORDER of the phenomena, and not their CAUSE, which we are able to refer to the usual course of nature.

Dr. Asa Gray, in the excellent essay already cited, has pointed out that there is no tendency in the doctrine of Variation and Natural Selection to weaken the foundations of Natural Theology, for, consistently with the derivative hypothesis of species, we may hold any of the popular views respecting the manner in which the changes of the natural world are brought about. We may imagine "that events and operations in general go on in virtue simply of forces communicated at the first, and without any subsequent interference, or we may hold that now and then, and only now and then, there is a direct interposition of the Deity; or, lastly, we may suppose that all the changes are carried on by the immediate orderly and constant, however infinitely diversified, action of the intelligent, efficient Cause." They who maintain that the origin of an individual, as well as the origin of a species or a genus, can be explained only by the direct action of the creative cause, may retain their favourite theory compatibly with the doctrine of transmutation.

Professor Agassiz, having observed that, "while human thought is consecutive, divine thought is simultaneous," Dr. Asa Gray has replied that, "if divine thought is simultaneous, we have no right to affirm the same of divine action."

The whole course of nature may be the material embodiment of a preconcerted arrangement; and if the succession of events be explained by transmutation, the perpetual adaptation of the organic world to new conditions leaves the argument in favour of design, and therefore of a designer, as valid as ever; "for to do any work by an instrument must require, and therefore presuppose, the exertion rather of more than of less power, than to do it directly."*

(* Asa Gray, "Natural Selection not inconsistent with Natural Theology" Trubner & Co. London 1861 page 55.)

As to the charge of materialism brought against all forms of the development theory, Dr. Gray has done well to remind us that "of the two great minds of the seventeenth century, Newton and Leibnitz, both profoundly religious as well as philosophical, one produced the theory of gravitation, the other objected to that theory, that it was subversive of natural religion."*

(* Ibid. page 31.)

It may be said that, so far from having a materialistic tendency, the supposed introduction into the earth at successive geological periods of life--sensation--instinct--the intelligence of the higher mammalia bordering on reason--and lastly the improvable reason of Man himself, presents us with a picture of the ever-increasing dominion of mind over matter.

NOTES.

[Footnote 1: The classification of the strata above the Chalk, as at present employed by the majority of British geologists, is merely a slight modification of that proposed by Lyell in 1833. The subdivisions generally recognised are as follows (Lake and Rastall, "Textbook of Geology," London, 1910, page 438):--

Neogene: Pleistocene Pliocene Miocene.

Palaeogene: Oligocene Eocene.

This differs chiefly from Lyell's classification in the introduction of the term Oligocene for the upper part of the original Eocene, which was somewhat unwieldy. In the earlier editions of the "Antiquity of Man" and of the "Principles of Geology," the strata here classed as Pleistocene were designated as Post-pliocene. The term "diluvium," now obsolete in Britain but still lingering on the Continent, is equivalent to Pleistocene. This subdivision is still sometimes separated from the Tertiary, as the Quaternary epoch. This, however, is unnecessary and indeed objectionable, as attributing too great importance to relatively insignificant deposits. There is no definite break, either stratigraphical or palaeontological, at the top of the Pliocene, and it is most natural to regard the Tertiary epoch as still in progress. Equally unnecessary is the separation of the post-glacial deposits as "Recent," a distinction which still prevails in many quarters, apparently with the sole object of adding another name to an already over-burdened list.]

[Footnote 2: The table of strata here printed is not that given by Lyell in the later editions of the "Antiquity of Man." This would have required so much explanation in the light of modern work that it was thought better to abolish it altogether and to substitute an entirely new table, which is to some extent a compromise between the numerous classifications now in vogue. In this form it is only strictly applicable to the British Isles, though the divisions adopted in other countries are generally similar, and in many cases identical.]

[Footnote 3: A similar succession of forest-beds, five in number, has been observed in the peat of the Fenland, near Ely. Each bed consists for the most part of a single species of tree, and a definite succession of oak, yew, Scotch fir, alder, and willow has been made out. The forest beds are supposed to indicate temporarily drier conditions, due either to changes of climate or to slight uplift of the land, the growth of peat being renewed during periods of damp climate or of depression of the land. (See Clement Reid, "Submerged Forests," Cambridge, 1913.)]

[Footnote 4: Since the "Stone Age," in the sense in which the term is here employed, obviously occupied an enormous lapse of time and embraced very different stages of culture, it has been found convenient to subdivide it into two primary subdivisions. For these Lord Avebury proposed in 1865 the terms Palaeolithic and Neolithic. (" Prehistoric Times," London, 1865, page 60.) The first comprises the ages during which man fabricated flint implements solely by chipping, whereas the implements of Neolithic Age are polished by rubbing. But there is another and more fundamental distinction. Palaeolithic man was exclusively a hunter, and consequently nomadic in his habits; Neolithic man possessed domesticated animals and cultivated crops. A pastoral and agricultural life implies a settled abode, and these are found, for example, in the lake-villages of Switzerland. The "kitchen-middens" of Denmark also indicate long continuance in one place, in this instance the seashore.]

[Footnote 5: The famous case of the so-called Temple of Serapis at Pozzuoli, has given rise to a considerable literature. The subject is discussed by Suess at length ("Des Antlitz der Erde," Vienna, 1888,