I
　　THETHREEHYPOTHESESRESPECTINGTHEHISTORYOFNATURE
　　Weliveinandformpartofasystemofthingsofimmensediversityandperplexity，whichwecallNature；anditisamatterofthedeepestinteresttoallofusthatweshouldformjustconceptionsoftheconstitutionofthatsystemandofitspasthistory。Withrelationtothisuniverse，manis，inextent，littlemorethanamathematicalpoint；indurationbutafleetingshadow；heisamerereedshakeninthewindsofforce。
　　ButasPascallongagoremarked，althoughamerereed，heisathinkingreed；andinvirtueofthatwonderfulcapacityofthought，hehasthepowerofframingforhimselfasymbolicconceptionoftheuniverse，which，althoughdoubtlesshighlyimperfectandinadequateasapictureofthegreatwhole，isyetsufficienttoservehimasachartfortheguidanceofhispracticalaffairs。IthastakenlongagesoftoilsomeandoftenfruitlesslabourtoenablemantolooksteadilyattheshiftingscenesofthephantasmagoriaofNature，tonoticewhatisfixedamongherfluctuations，andwhatisregularamongherapparentirregularities；anditisonlycomparativelylately，withinthelastfewcenturies，thattheconceptionofauniversalorderandofadefinitecourseofthings，whichwetermthecourseofNature，hasemerged。
　　But，onceoriginated，theconceptionoftheconstancyoftheorderofNaturehasbecomethedominantideaofmodernthought。
　　Toanypersonwhoisfamiliarwiththefactsuponwhichthatconceptionisbased，andiscompetenttoestimatetheirsignificance，ithasceasedtobeconceivablethatchanceshouldhaveanyplaceintheuniverse，orthateventsshoulddependuponanybutthenaturalsequenceofcauseandeffect。Wehavecometolookuponthepresentasthechildofthepastandastheparentofthefuture；and，aswehaveexcludedchancefromaplaceintheuniverse，soweignore，evenasapossibility，thenotionofanyinterferencewiththeorderofNature。
　　Whatevermaybemen’sspeculativedoctrines，itisquitecertainthateveryintelligentpersonguideshislifeandriskshisfortuneuponthebeliefthattheorderofNatureisconstant，andthatthechainofnaturalcausationisneverbroken。
　　Infact，nobeliefwhichweentertainhassocompletealogicalbasisasthattowhichIhavejustreferred。Ittacitlyunderlieseveryprocessofreasoning；itisthefoundationofeveryactofthewill。Itisbaseduponthebroadestinduction，anditisverifiedbythemostconstant，regular，anduniversalofdeductiveprocesses。Butwemustrecollectthatanyhumanbelief，howeverbroaditsbasis，howeverdefensibleitmayseem，is，afterall，onlyaprobablebelief，andthatourwidestandsafestgeneralisationsaresimplystatementsofthehighestdegreeofprobability。ThoughwearequiteclearabouttheconstancyoftheorderofNature，atthepresenttime，andinthepresentstateofthings，itbynomeansnecessarilyfollowsthatwearejustifiedinexpandingthisgeneralisationintotheinfinitepast，andindenying，absolutely，thattheremayhavebeenatimewhenNaturedidnotfollowafixedorder，whentherelationsofcauseandeffectwerenotdefinite，andwhenextra-
　　naturalagenciesinterferedwiththegeneralcourseofNature。
　　Cautiousmenwillallowthatauniversesodifferentfromthatwhichweknowmayhaveexisted；justasaverycandidthinkermayadmitthataworldinwhichtwoandtwodonotmakefour，andinwhichtwostraightlinesdoincloseaspace，mayexist。
　　Butthesamecautionwhichforcestheadmissionofsuchpossibilitiesdemandsagreatdealofevidencebeforeitrecognisesthemtobeanythingmoresubstantial。Andwhenitisassertedthat，somanythousandyearsago，eventsoccurredinamannerutterlyforeigntoandinconsistentwiththeexistinglawsofNature，men，whowithoutbeingparticularlycautious，aresimplyhonestthinkers，unwillingtodeceivethemselvesordeludeothers，askfortrustworthyevidenceofthefact。
　　Didthingssohappenordidtheynot？Thisisahistoricalquestion，andonetheanswertowhichmustbesoughtinthesamewayasthesolutionofanyotherhistoricalproblem。
　　SofarasIknow，thereareonlythreehypotheseswhicheverhavebeenentertained，orwhichwellcanbeentertained，respectingthepasthistoryofNature。Iwill，inthefirstplace，statethehypotheses，andthenIwillconsiderwhatevidencebearinguponthemisinourpossession，andbywhatlightofcriticismthatevidenceistobeinterpreted。
　　Uponthefirsthypothesis，theassumptionis，thatphenomenaofNaturesimilartothoseexhibitedbythepresentworldhavealwaysexisted；inotherwords，thattheuniversehasexisted，fromalleternity，inwhatmaybebroadlytermeditspresentcondition。
　　Thesecondhypothesisisthatthepresentstateofthingshashadonlyalimitedduration；andthat，atsomeperiodinthepast，aconditionoftheworld，essentiallysimilartothatwhichwenowknow，cameintoexistence，withoutanyprecedentconditionfromwhichitcouldhavenaturallyproceeded。
　　TheassumptionthatsuccessivestatesofNaturehavearisen，eachwithoutanyrelationofnaturalcausationtoanantecedentstate，isameremodificationofthissecondhypothesis。
　　Thethirdhypothesisalsoassumesthatthepresentstateofthingshashadbutalimitedduration；butitsupposesthatthisstatehasbeenevolvedbyanaturalprocessfromanantecedentstate，andthatfromanother，andsoon；and，onthishypothesis，theattempttoassignanylimittotheseriesofpastchangesis，usually，givenup。
　　ItissoneedfultoformclearanddistinctnotionsofwhatisreallymeantbyeachofthesehypothesesthatIwillaskyoutoimaginewhat，accordingtoeach，wouldhavebeenvisibletoaspectatoroftheeventswhichconstitutethehistoryoftheearth。Onthefirsthypothesis，howeverfarbackintimethatspectatormightbeplaced，hewouldseeaworldessentially，thoughperhapsnotinallitsdetails，similartothatwhichnowexists。Theanimalswhichexistedwouldbetheancestorsofthosewhichnowlive，andsimilartothem；theplants，inlikemanner，wouldbesuchasweknow；andthemountains，plains，andwaterswouldforeshadowthesalientfeaturesofourpresentlandandwater。Thisviewwasheldmoreorlessdistinctly，sometimescombinedwiththenotionofrecurrentcyclesofchange，inancienttimes；anditsinfluencehasbeenfeltdowntothepresentday。ItisworthyofremarkthatitisahypothesiswhichisnotinconsistentwiththedoctrineofUniformitarianism，withwhichgeologistsarefamiliar。
　　ThatdoctrinewasheldbyHutton，andinhisearlierdaysbyLyell。Huttonwasstruckbythedemonstrationofastronomersthattheperturbationsoftheplanetarybodies，howevergreattheymaybe，yetsoonerorlaterrightthemselves；andthatthesolarsystempossessesaself-adjustingpowerbywhichtheseaberrationsareallbroughtbacktoameancondition。
　　Huttonimaginedthatthelikemightbetrueofterrestrialchanges；althoughnoonerecognisedmoreclearlythanhethefactthatthedrylandisbeingconstantlywasheddownbyrainandriversanddepositedinthesea；andthatthus，inalongerorshortertime，theinequalitiesoftheearth’ssurfacemustbelevelled，anditshighlandsbroughtdowntotheocean。
　　But，takingintoaccounttheinternalforcesoftheearth，which，upheavingthesea-bottomgiverisetonewland，hethoughtthattheseoperationsofdegradationandelevationmightcompensateeachother；andthatthus，foranyassignabletime，thegeneralfeaturesofourplanetmightremainwhattheyare。
　　Andinasmuchas，underthesecircumstances，thereneedbenolimittothepropagationofanimalsandplants，itisclearthattheconsistentworkingoutoftheuniformitarianideamightleadtotheconceptionoftheeternityoftheworld。NotthatImeantosaythateitherHuttonorLyellheldthisconception——
　　assuredlynot；theywouldhavebeenthefirsttorepudiateit。
　　Nevertheless，thelogicaldevelopmentofsomeoftheirargumentstendsdirectlytowardsthishypothesis。
　　Thesecondhypothesissupposesthatthepresentorderofthings，atsomenoveryremotetime，hadasuddenorigin，andthattheworld，suchasitnowis，hadchaosforitsphenomenalantecedent。ThatisthedoctrinewhichyouwillfindstatedmostfullyandclearlyintheimmortalpoemofJohnMilton——theEnglishDivinaCommedia——"ParadiseLost。"Ibelieveitislargelytotheinfluenceofthatremarkablework，combinedwiththedailyteachingstowhichwehavealllistenedinourchildhood，thatthishypothesisowesitsgeneralwidediffusionasoneofthecurrentbeliefsofEnglish-speakingpeople。Ifyouturntotheseventhbookof"ParadiseLost，"youwillfindtherestatedthehypothesistowhichIrefer，whichisbrieflythis：
　　Thatthisvisibleuniverseofourscameintoexistenceatnogreatdistanceoftimefromthepresent；andthatthepartsofwhichitiscomposedmadetheirappearance，inacertaindefiniteorder，inthespaceofsixnaturaldays，insuchamannerthat，onthefirstofthesedays，lightappeared；that，onthesecond，thefirmament，orsky，separatedthewatersabove，fromthewatersbeneaththefirmament；that，onthethirdday，thewatersdrewawayfromthedryland，anduponitavariedvegetablelife，similartothatwhichnowexists，madeitsappearance；thatthefourthdaywassignalisedbytheapparitionofthesun，thestars，themoon，andtheplanets；
　　that，onthefifthday，aquaticanimalsoriginatedwithinthewaters；that，onthesixthday，theearthgaverisetoourfour-
　　footedterrestrialcreatures，andtoallvarietiesofterrestrialanimalsexceptbirds，whichhadappearedontheprecedingday；and，finally，thatmanappearedupontheearth，andtheemergenceoftheuniversefromchaoswasfinished。
　　Miltontellsus，withouttheleastambiguity，whataspectatorofthesemarvellousoccurrenceswouldhavewitnessed。Idoubtnotthathispoemisfamiliartoallofyou，butIshouldliketorecallonepassagetoyourminds，inorderthatImaybejustifiedinwhatIhavesaidregardingtheperfectlyconcrete，definite，pictureoftheoriginoftheanimalworldwhichMiltondraws。Hesays：——
　　"Thesixth，andofcreationlast，aroseWitheveningharpandmatin，whenGodsaid，’Lettheearthbringforthsoullivinginherkind，Cattleandcreepingthings，andbeastoftheearth。
　　Eachintheirkind！’Theearthobeyed，and，straightOpeningherfertilewomb，teemedatabirthInnumerouslivingcreatures，perfectforms，Limbedandfull-grown。Outofthegrounduprose，Asfromhislair，thewildbeast，wherehewonsInforestwild，inthicket，brake，orden；
　　Amongthetreesinpairstheyrose，theywalked；
　　Thecattleinthefieldsandmeadowsgreen；
　　Thoserareandsolitary；theseinflocksPasturingatonce，andinbroadherdsupsprung。
　　Thegrassyclodsnowcalved；nowhalfappearsThetawnylion，pawingtogetfreeHishinderparts——thensprings，asbrokefrombonds，Andrampantshakeshisbrindedmane；theounce，Thelibbard，andthetiger，asthemoleRising，thecrumbledearthabovethemthrewInhillocks；theswiftstagfromundergroundBoreuphisbranchinghead；scarcefromhismouldBehemoth，biggestbornofearth，upheavedHisvastness；fleecedtheflocksandbleatingroseAsplants；ambiguousbetweenseaandland，Theriver-horseandscalycrocodile。
　　Atoncecameforthwhatevercreepstheground，Insectorworm。"
　　Thereisnodoubtastothemeaningofthisstatement，norastowhatamanofMilton’sgeniusexpectedwouldhavebeenactuallyvisibletoaneye-witnessofthismodeoforiginationoflivingthings。
　　Thethirdhypothesis，orthehypothesisofevolution，supposesthat，atanycomparativelylateperiodofpasttime，ourimaginaryspectatorwouldmeetwithastateofthingsverysimilartothatwhichnowobtains；butthatthelikenessofthepasttothepresentwouldgraduallybecomelessandless，inproportiontotheremotenessofhisperiodofobservationfromthepresentday；thattheexistingdistributionofmountainsandplains，ofriversandseas，wouldshowitselftobetheproductofaslowprocessofnaturalchangeoperatinguponmoreandmorewidelydifferentantecedentconditionsofthemineralframe-workoftheearth；until，atlength，inplaceofthatframe-work，hewouldbeholdonlyavastnebulousmass，representingtheconstituentsofthesunandoftheplanetarybodies。Precedingtheformsoflifewhichnowexist，ourobserverwouldseeanimalsandplants，notidenticalwiththem，butlikethem，increasingtheirdifferenceswiththeirantiquityand，atthesametime，becomingsimplerandsimpler；until，finally，theworldoflifewouldpresentnothingbutthatundifferentiatedprotoplasmicmatterwhich，sofarasourpresentknowledgegoes，isthecommonfoundationofallvitalactivity。
　　Thehypothesisofevolutionsupposesthatinallthisvastprogressiontherewouldbenobreachofcontinuity，nopointatwhichwecouldsay"Thisisanaturalprocess，"and"Thisisnotanaturalprocess；"butthatthewholemightbecomparedtothatwonderfuloperationofdevelopmentwhichmaybeseengoingoneverydayunderoureyes，invirtueofwhichtherearises，outofthesemi-fluidcomparativelyhomogeneoussubstancewhichwecallanegg，thecomplicatedorganisationofoneofthehigheranimals。That，inafewwords，iswhatismeantbythehypothesisofevolution。
　　Ihavealreadysuggestedthat，indealingwiththesethreehypotheses，inendeavouringtoformajudgmentastowhichofthemisthemoreworthyofbelief，orwhethernoneisworthyofbelief——inwhichcaseourconditionofmindshouldbethatsuspensionofjudgmentwhichissodifficulttoallbuttrainedintellects——weshouldbeindifferenttoallapriori
　　considerations。Thequestionisaquestionofhistoricalfact。
　　Theuniversehascomeintoexistencesomehoworother，andtheproblemis，whetheritcameintoexistenceinonefashion，orwhetheritcameintoexistenceinanother；and，asanessentialpreliminarytofurtherdiscussion，permitmetosaytwoorthreewordsastothenatureandthekindsofhistoricalevidence。
　　Theevidenceastotheoccurrenceofanyeventinpasttimemayberangedundertwoheadswhich，forconvenience’sake，Iwillspeakofastestimonialevidenceandascircumstantialevidence。
　　BytestimonialevidenceImeanhumantestimony；andbycircumstantialevidenceImeanevidencewhichisnothumantestimony。LetmeillustratebyafamiliarexamplewhatI
　　understandbythesetwokindsofevidence，andwhatistobesaidrespectingtheirvalue。
　　Supposethatamantellsyouthathesawapersonstrikeanotherandkillhim；thatistestimonialevidenceofthefactofmurder。Butitispossibletohavecircumstantialevidenceofthefactofmurder；thatistosay，youmayfindamandyingwithawounduponhisheadhavingexactlytheformandcharacterofthewoundwhichismadebyanaxe，and，withduecareintakingsurroundingcircumstancesintoaccount，youmayconcludewiththeutmostcertaintythatthemanhasbeenmurdered；
　　thathisdeathistheconsequenceofablowinflictedbyanothermanwiththatimplement。Weareverymuchinthehabitofconsideringcircumstantialevidenceasoflessvaluethantestimonialevidence，anditmaybethat，wherethecircumstancesarenotperfectlyclearandintelligible，itisadangerousandunsafekindofevidence；butitmustnotbeforgottenthat，inmanycases，circumstantialisquiteasconclusiveastestimonialevidence，andthat，notunfrequently，itisagreatdealweightierthantestimonialevidence。
　　Forexample，takethecasetowhichIreferredjustnow。
　　Thecircumstantialevidencemaybebetterandmoreconvincingthanthetestimonialevidence；foritmaybeimpossible，undertheconditionsthatIhavedefined，tosupposethatthemanmethisdeathfromanycausebuttheviolentblowofanaxewieldedbyanotherman。Thecircumstantialevidenceinfavourofamurderhavingbeencommitted，inthatcase，isascompleteandasconvincingasevidencecanbe。Itisevidencewhichisopentonodoubtandtonofalsification。Butthetestimonyofawitnessisopentomultitudinousdoubts。Hemayhavebeenmistaken。Hemayhavebeenactuatedbymalice。Ithasconstantlyhappenedthatevenanaccuratemanhasdeclaredthatathinghashappenedinthis，that，ortheotherway，whenacarefulanalysisofthecircumstantialevidencehasshownthatitdidnothappeninthatway，butinsomeotherway。
　　Wemaynowconsidertheevidenceinfavouroforagainstthethreehypotheses。Letmefirstdirectyourattentiontowhatistobesaidaboutthehypothesisoftheeternityofthestateofthingsinwhichwenowlive。Whatwillfirststrikeyouis，thatitisahypothesiswhich，whethertrueorfalse，isnotcapableofverificationbyanyevidence。For，inordertoobtaineithercircumstantialortestimonialevidencesufficienttoprovetheeternityofdurationofthepresentstateofnature，youmusthaveaneternityofwitnessesoraninfinityofcircumstances，andneitheroftheseisattainable。Itisutterlyimpossiblethatsuchevidenceshouldbecarriedbeyondacertainpointoftime；andallthatcouldbesaid，atmost，wouldbe，thatsofarastheevidencecouldbetraced，therewasnothingtocontradictthehypothesis。Butwhenyoulook，nottothetestimonialevidence——which，consideringtherelativeinsignificanceoftheantiquityofhumanrecords，mightnotbegoodformuchinthiscase——buttothecircumstantialevidence，thenyoufindthatthishypothesisisabsolutelyincompatiblewithsuchevidenceaswehave；whichisofsoplainandsosimpleacharacterthatitisimpossibleinanywaytoescapefromtheconclusionswhichitforcesuponus。
　　Youare，doubtless，allawarethattheoutersubstanceoftheearth，whichaloneisaccessibletodirectobservation，isnotofahomogeneouscharacter，butthatitismadeupofanumberoflayersorstrata，thetitlesoftheprincipalgroupsofwhichareplacedupontheaccompanyingdiagram。Eachofthesegroupsrepresentsanumberofbedsofsand，ofstone，ofclay，ofslate，andofvariousothermaterials。
　　Oncarefulexamination，itisfoundthatthematerialsofwhicheachoftheselayersofmoreorlesshardrockarecomposedare，forthemostpart，ofthesamenatureasthosewhichareatpresentbeingformedunderknownconditionsonthesurfaceoftheearth。Forexample，thechalk，whichconstitutesagreatpartoftheCretaceousformationinsomepartsoftheworld，ispracticallyidenticalinitsphysicalandchemicalcharacterswithasubstancewhichisnowbeingformedatthebottomoftheAtlanticOcean，andcoversanenormousarea；otherbedsofrockarecomparablewiththesandswhicharebeingformeduponsea-
　　shores，packedtogether，andsoon。Thus，omittingrocksofigneousorigin，itisdemonstrablethatallthesebedsofstone，ofwhichatotalofnotlessthanseventythousandfeetisknown，havebeenformedbynaturalagencies，eitheroutofthewasteandwashingofthedryland，orelsebytheaccumulationoftheexuviaeofplantsandanimals。Manyofthesestrataarefullofsuchexuviae——theso-called"fossils。"Remainsofthousandsofspeciesofanimalsandplants，asperfectlyrecognisableasthoseofexistingformsoflifewhichyoumeetwithinmuseums，orastheshellswhichyoupickupuponthesea-beach，havebeenimbeddedintheancientsands，ormuds，orlimestones，justastheyarebeingimbeddednow，insandy，orclayey，orcalcareoussubaqueousdeposits。Theyfurnishuswitharecord，thegeneralnatureofwhichcannotbemisinterpreted，ofthekindsofthingsthathaveliveduponthesurfaceoftheearthduringthetimethatisregisteredbythisgreatthicknessofstratifiedrocks。Butevenasuperficialstudyofthesefossilsshowsusthattheanimalsandplantswhichliveatthepresenttimehavehadonlyatemporaryduration；fortheremainsofsuchmodernformsoflifearemetwith，forthemostpart，onlyintheuppermostorlatesttertiaries，andtheirnumberrapidlydiminishesinthelowerdepositsofthatepoch。Intheoldertertiaries，theplacesofexistinganimalsandplantsaretakenbyotherforms，asnumerousanddiversifiedasthosewhichlivenowinthesamelocalities，butmoreorlessdifferentfromthem；inthemesozoicrocks，thesearereplacedbyothersyetmoredivergentfrommoderntypes；and，inthepaleozoicformations，thecontrastisstillmoremarked。Thusthecircumstantialevidenceabsolutelynegativestheconceptionoftheeternityofthepresentconditionofthings。Wecansay，withcertainty，thatthepresentconditionofthingshasexistedforacomparativelyshortperiod；andthat，sofarasanimalandvegetablenatureareconcerned，ithasbeenprecededbyadifferentcondition。Wecanpursuethisevidenceuntilwereachthelowestofthestratifiedrocks，inwhichwelosetheindicationsoflifealtogether。Thehypothesisoftheeternityofthepresentstateofnaturemaythereforebeputoutofcourt。
　　Fig。1。——IdealSectionoftheCrustoftheEarth。
　　WenowcometowhatIwilltermMilton’shypothesis——thehypothesisthatthepresentconditionofthingshasenduredforacomparativelyshorttime；and，atthecommencementofthattime，cameintoexistencewithinthecourseofsixdays。IdoubtnotthatitmayhaveexcitedsomesurpriseinyourmindsthatI
　　shouldhavespokenofthisasMilton’shypothesis，ratherthanthatIshouldhavechosenthetermswhicharemorecustomary，suchas"thedoctrineofcreation，"or"theBiblicaldoctrine，"
　　or"thedoctrineofMoses，"allofwhichdenominations，asappliedtothehypothesistowhichIhavejustreferred，arecertainlymuchmorefamiliartoyouthanthetitleoftheMiltonichypothesis。ButIhavehadwhatIcannotbutthinkareveryweightyreasonsfortakingthecoursewhichIhavepursued。
　　Inthefirstplace，Ihavediscardedthetitleofthe"doctrineofcreation，"becausemypresentbusinessisnotwiththequestionwhytheobjectswhichconstituteNaturecameintoexistence，butwhentheycameintoexistence，andinwhatorder。
　　ThisisasstrictlyahistoricalquestionasthequestionwhentheAnglesandtheJutesinvadedEngland，andwhethertheyprecededorfollowedtheRomans。Butthequestionaboutcreationisaphilosophicalproblem，andonewhichcannotbesolved，orevenapproached，bythehistoricalmethod。Whatwewanttolearnis，whetherthefacts，sofarastheyareknown，affordevidencethatthingsaroseinthewaydescribedbyMilton，orwhethertheydonot；and，whenthatquestionissettleditwillbetimeenoughtoinquireintothecausesoftheirorigination。
　　Inthesecondplace，IhavenotspokenofthisdoctrineastheBiblicaldoctrine。ItisquitetruethatpersonsasdiverseintheirgeneralviewsasMiltontheProtestantandthecelebratedJesuitFatherSuarez，eachputuponthefirstchapterofGenesistheinterpretationembodiedinMilton’spoem。Itisquitetruethatthisinterpretationisthatwhichhasbeeninstilledintoeveryoneofusinourchildhood；butIdonotforonemomentventuretosaythatitcanproperlybecalledtheBiblicaldoctrine。Itisnotmybusiness，anddoesnotliewithinmycompetency，tosaywhattheHebrewtextdoes，andwhatitdoesnotsignify；moreover，wereItoaffirmthatthisistheBiblicaldoctrine，Ishouldbemetbytheauthorityofmanyeminentscholars，tosaynothingofmenofscience，who，atvarioustimes，haveabsolutelydeniedthatanysuchdoctrineistobefoundinGenesis。Ifwearetolistentomanyexpositorsofnomeanauthority，wemustbelievethatwhatseemssoclearlydefinedinGenesis——asifverygreatpainshadbeentakenthatthereshouldbenopossibilityofmistake——isnotthemeaningofthetextatall。Theaccountisdividedintoperiodsthatwemaymakejustaslongorasshortasconveniencerequires。Wearealsotounderstandthatitisconsistentwiththeoriginaltexttobelievethatthemostcomplexplantsandanimalsmayhavebeenevolvedbynaturalprocesses，lastingformillionsofyears，outofstructurelessrudiments。ApersonwhoisnotaHebrewscholarcanonlystandasideandadmirethemarvellousflexibilityofalanguagewhichadmitsofsuchdiverseinterpretations。Butassuredly，inthefaceofsuchcontradictionsofauthorityuponmattersrespectingwhichheisincompetenttoformanyjudgment，hewillabstain，asIdo，fromgivinganyopinion。
　　Inthethirdplace，IhavecarefullyabstainedfromspeakingofthisastheMosaicdoctrine，becausewearenowassuredupontheauthorityofthehighestcriticsandevenofdignitariesoftheChurch，thatthereisnoevidencethatMoseswrotetheBookofGenesis，orknewanythingaboutit。YouwillunderstandthatI
　　givenojudgment——itwouldbeanimpertinenceuponmyparttovolunteerevenasuggestion——uponsuchasubject。But，thatbeingthestateofopinionamongthescholarsandtheclergy，itiswellfortheunlearnedinHebrewlore，andforthelaity，toavoidentanglingthemselvesinsuchavexedquestion。
　　Happily，Miltonleavesusnoexcusefordoubtingwhathemeans，andIshallthereforebesafeinspeakingoftheopinioninquestionastheMiltonichypothesis。
　　Nowwehavetotestthathypothesis。Formypart，Ihavenoprejudiceonewayortheother。Ifthereisevidenceinfavourofthisview，Iamburdenedbynotheoreticaldifficultiesinthewayofacceptingit；buttheremustbeevidence。
　　Scientificmengetanawkwardhabit——no，Iwon’tcallitthat，foritisavaluablehabit——ofbelievingnothingunlessthereisevidenceforit；andtheyhaveawayoflookinguponbeliefwhichisnotbaseduponevidence，notonlyasillogical，butasimmoral。Wewill，ifyouplease，testthisviewbythecircumstantialevidencealone；for，fromwhatIhavesaid，youwillunderstandthatIdonotproposetodiscussthequestionofwhattestimonialevidenceistobeadducedinfavourofit。
　　Ifthosewhosebusinessitistojudgearenotatoneastotheauthenticityoftheonlyevidenceofthatkindwhichisoffered，norastothefactstowhichitbearswitness，thediscussionofsuchevidenceissuperfluous。
　　ButImaybepermittedtoregretthisnecessityofrejectingthetestimonialevidencetheless，becausetheexaminationofthecircumstantialevidenceleadstotheconclusion，notonlythatitisincompetenttojustifythehypothesis，butthat，sofarasitgoes，itiscontrarytothehypothesis。
　　TheconsiderationsuponwhichIbasethisconclusionareofthesimplestpossiblecharacter。TheMiltonichypothesiscontainsassertionsofaverydefinitecharacterrelatingtothesuccessionoflivingforms。Itisstatedthatplants，forexample，madetheirappearanceuponthethirdday，andnotbefore。Andyouwillunderstandthatwhatthepoetmeansbyplantsaresuchplantsasnowlive，theancestors，intheordinarywayofpropagationoflikebylike，ofthetreesandshrubswhichflourishinthepresentworld。Itmustneedsbeso；
　　for，iftheyweredifferent，eithertheexistingplantshavebeentheresultofaseparateoriginationsincethatdescribedbyMilton，ofwhichwehavenorecord，noranygroundforsuppositionthatsuchanoccurrencehastakenplace；orelsetheyhavearisenbyaprocessofevolutionfromtheoriginalstocks。
　　Inthesecondplace，itisclearthattherewasnoanimallifebeforethefifthday，andthat，onthefifthday，aquaticanimalsandbirdsappeared。Anditisfurtherclearthatterrestriallivingthings，otherthanbirds，madetheirappearanceuponthesixthdayandnotbefore。Hence，itfollowsthat，if，inthelargemassofcircumstantialevidenceastowhatreallyhashappenedinthepasthistoryoftheglobewefindindicationsoftheexistenceofterrestrialanimals，otherthanbirds，atacertainperiod，itisperfectlycertainthatallthathastakenplace，sincethattime，mustbereferredtothesixthday。
　　InthegreatCarboniferousformation，whenceAmericaderivessovastaproportionofheractualandpotentialwealth，inthebedsofcoalwhichhavebeenformedfromthevegetationofthatperiod，wefindabundantevidenceoftheexistenceofterrestrialanimals。Theyhavebeendescribed，notonlybyEuropeanbutbyyourownnaturalists。Therearetobefoundnumerousinsectsalliedtoourcockroaches。Therearetobefoundspidersandscorpionsoflargesize，thelattersosimilartoexistingscorpionsthatitrequiresthepractisedeyeofthenaturalisttodistinguishthem。InasmuchastheseanimalscanbeprovedtohavebeenaliveintheCarboniferousepoch，itisperfectlyclearthat，iftheMiltonicaccountistobeaccepted，thehugemassofrocksextendingfromthemiddleofthePalaeozoicformationstotheuppermostmembersoftheseries，mustbelongtothedaywhichistermedbyMiltonthesixth。
　　But，further，itisexpresslystatedthataquaticanimalstooktheiroriginonthefifthday，andnotbefore；hence，allformationsinwhichremainsofaquaticanimalscanbeprovedtoexist，andwhichthereforetestifythatsuchanimalslivedatthetimewhentheseformationswereincourseofdeposition，musthavebeendepositedduringorsincetheperiodwhichMiltonspeaksofasthefifthday。Butthereisabsolutelynofossiliferousformationinwhichtheremainsofaquaticanimalsareabsent。TheoldestfossilsintheSilurianrocksareexuviaeofmarineanimals；andiftheviewwhichisentertainedbyPrincipalDawsonandDr。CarpenterrespectingthenatureoftheEozoonbewell-founded，aquaticanimalsexistedataperiodasfarantecedenttothedepositionofthecoalasthecoalisfromus；inasmuchastheEozoonismetwithinthoseLaurentianstratawhichlieatthebottomoftheseriesofstratifiedrocks。Henceitfollows，plainlyenough，thatthewholeseriesofstratifiedrocks，iftheyaretobebroughtintoharmonywithMilton，mustbereferredtothefifthandsixthdays，andthatwecannothopetofindtheslightesttraceoftheproductsoftheearlierdaysinthegeologicalrecord。Whenweconsiderthesesimplefacts，weseehowabsolutelyfutilearetheattemptsthathavebeenmadetodrawaparallelbetweenthestorytoldbysomuchofthecrustoftheearthasisknowntousandthestorywhichMiltontells。Thewholeseriesoffossiliferousstratifiedrocksmustbereferredtothelasttwodays；andneithertheCarboniferous，noranyother，formationcanaffordevidenceoftheworkofthethirdday。
　　NotonlyistherethisobjectiontoanyattempttoestablishaharmonybetweentheMiltonicaccountandthefactsrecordedinthefossiliferousrocks，butthereisafurtherdifficulty。
　　AccordingtotheMiltonicaccount，theorderinwhichanimalsshouldhavemadetheirappearanceinthestratifiedrockswouldbethus：Fishes，includingthegreatwhales，andbirds；
　　afterthem，allvarietiesofterrestrialanimalsexceptbirds。
　　Nothingcouldbefurtherfromthefactsaswefindthem；weknowofnottheslightestevidenceoftheexistenceofbirdsbeforetheJurassic，orperhapstheTriassic，formation；
　　whileterrestrialanimals，aswehavejustseen，occurintheCarboniferousrocks。
　　IftherewereanyharmonybetweentheMiltonicaccountandthecircumstantialevidence，weoughttohaveabundantevidenceoftheexistenceofbirdsintheCarboniferous，theDevonian，andtheSilurianrocks。Ineedhardlysaythatthisisnotthecase，andthatnotatraceofbirdsmakesitsappearanceuntilthefarlaterperiodwhichIhavementioned。
　　Andagain，ifitbetruethatallvarietiesoffishesandthegreatwhales，andthelike，madetheirappearanceonthefifthday，weoughttofindtheremainsoftheseanimalsintheolderrocks——inthosewhichweredepositedbeforetheCarboniferousepoch。Fisheswedofind，inconsiderablenumberandvariety；
　　butthegreatwhalesareabsent，andthefishesarenotsuchasnowlive。NotonesolitaryspeciesoffishnowinexistenceistobefoundintheDevonianorSilurianformations。HenceweareintroducedafreshtothedilemmawhichIhavealreadyplacedbeforeyou：eithertheanimalswhichcameintoexistenceonthefifthdaywerenotsuchasthosewhicharefoundatpresent，arenotthedirectandimmediateancestorsofthosewhichnowexist；
　　inwhichcase，eitherfreshcreationsofwhichnothingissaid，oraprocessofevolution，musthaveoccurred；orelsethewholestorymustbegivenup，asnotonlydevoidofanycircumstantialevidence，butcontrarytosuchevidenceasexists。
　　Iplacedbeforeyouinafewwords，somelittletimeago，astatementofthesumandsubstanceofMilton’shypothesis。
　　Letmenowtrytostateasbriefly，theeffectofthecircumstantialevidencebearinguponthepasthistoryoftheearthwhichisfurnished，withoutthepossibilityofmistake，withnochanceoferrorastoitschieffeatures，bythestratifiedrocks。Whatwefindis，thatthegreatseriesofformationsrepresentsaperiodoftimeofwhichourhumanchronologieshardlyaffordusaunitofmeasure。Iwillnotpretendtosayhowweoughttoestimatethistime，inmillionsorinbillionsofyears。Formypurpose，thedeterminationofitsabsolutedurationiswhollyunessential。Butthatthetimewasenormoustherecanbenoquestion。
　　Itresultsfromthesimplestmethodsofinterpretation，thatleavingoutofviewcertainpatchesofmetamorphosedrocks，andcertainvolcanicproducts，allthatisnowdrylandhasoncebeenatthebottomofthewaters。Itisperfectlycertainthat，atacomparativelyrecentperiodoftheworld’shistory——theCretaceousepoch——noneofthegreatphysicalfeatureswhichatpresentmarkthesurfaceoftheglobeexisted。ItiscertainthattheRockyMountainswerenot。ItiscertainthattheHimalayaMountainswerenot。ItiscertainthattheAlpsandthePyreneeshadnoexistence。Theevidenceisoftheplainestpossiblecharacterandissimplythis：——Wefindraisedupontheflanksofthesemountains，elevatedbytheforcesofupheavalwhichhavegivenrisetothem，massesofCretaceousrockwhichformedthebottomoftheseabeforethosemountainsexisted。
　　ItisthereforeclearthattheelevatoryforceswhichgaverisetothemountainsoperatedsubsequentlytotheCretaceousepoch；
　　andthatthemountainsthemselvesarelargelymadeupofthematerialsdepositedintheseawhichonceoccupiedtheirplace。
　　Aswegobackintime，wemeetwithconstantalternationsofseaandland，ofestuaryandopenocean；and，incorrespondencewiththesealternations，weobservethechangesinthefaunaandfloratowhichIhavereferred。
　　Buttheinspectionofthesechangesgivesusnorighttobelievethattherehasbeenanydiscontinuityinnaturalprocesses。
　　Thereisnotraceofgeneralcataclysms，ofuniversaldeluges，orsuddendestructionsofawholefaunaorflora。
　　Theappearanceswhichwereformerlyinterpretedinthatwayhaveallbeenshowntobedelusive，asourknowledgehasincreasedandastheblankswhichformerlyappearedtoexistbetweenthedifferentformationshavebeenfilledup。Thatthereisnoabsolutebreakbetweenformationandformation，thattherehasbeennosuddendisappearanceofalltheformsoflifeandreplacementofthembyothers，butthatchangeshavegoneonslowlyandgradually，thatonetypehasdiedoutandanotherhastakenitsplace，andthatthus，byinsensibledegrees，onefaunahasbeenreplacedbyanother，areconclusionsstrengthenedbyconstantlyincreasingevidence。Sothatwithinthewholeoftheimmenseperiodindicatedbythefossiliferousstratifiedrocks，thereisassuredlynottheslightestproofofanybreakintheuniformityofNature’soperations，noindicationthateventshavefollowedotherthanaclearandorderlysequence。
　　That，Isay，isthenaturalandobviousteachingofthecircumstantialevidencecontainedinthestratifiedrocks。I
　　leaveyoutoconsiderhowfar，byanyingenuityofinterpretation，byanystretchingofthemeaningoflanguage，itcanbebroughtintoharmonywiththeMiltonichypothesis。
　　Thereremainsthethirdhypothesis，thatofwhichIhavespokenasthehypothesisofevolution；andIpurposethat，inlecturestocome，weshoulddiscussitascarefullyaswehaveconsideredtheothertwohypotheses。Ineednotsaythatitisquitehopelesstolookfortestimonialevidenceofevolution。Theverynatureofthecaseprecludesthepossibilityofsuchevidence，forthehumanracecannomorebeexpectedtotestifytoitsownorigin，thanachildcanbetenderedasawitnessofitsownbirth。Oursoleinquiryis，whatfoundationcircumstantialevidencelendstothehypothesis，orwhetheritlendsnone，orwhetheritcontrovertsthehypothesis。Ishalldealwiththematterentirelyasaquestionofhistory。Ishallnotindulgeinthediscussionofanyspeculativeprobabilities。IshallnotattempttoshowthatNatureisunintelligibleunlessweadoptsomesuchhypothesis。ForanythingIknowaboutthematter，itmaybethewayofNaturetobeunintelligible；sheisoftenpuzzling，andIhavenoreasontosupposethatsheisboundtofitherselftoournotions。
　　Ishallplacebeforeyouthreekindsofevidenceentirelybaseduponwhatisknownoftheformsofanimallifewhicharecontainedintheseriesofstratifiedrocks。Ishallendeavourtoshowyouthatthereisonekindofevidencewhichisneutral，whichneitherhelpsevolutionnorisinconsistentwithit。
　　Ishallthenbringforwardasecondkindofevidencewhichindicatesastrongprobabilityinfavourofevolution，butdoesnotproveit；and，lastly，Ishalladduceathirdkindofevidencewhich，beingascompleteasanyevidencewhichwecanhopetoobtainuponsuchasubject，andbeingwhollyandstrikinglyinfavourofevolution，mayfairlybecalleddemonstrativeevidenceofitsoccurrence。