The Gospel: An Exposition of its First Principles / Revised and Enlarged Edition

by B. H. Roberts

A discussion of this subject must be very imperfect, not to say partial, that does not give some attention to the various theories—at least to the most prominent ones—of man's origin. It is scarcely necessary to say that theories on the subject are quite numerous and widely different; and that in each school of philosophers are men eminent for their learning and intelligence. All existing theories, however, may be arranged under three headings: First, the monogenists, who hold that mankind have descended from a single human pair, created by Deity; and their descendants, modified by climatic influences, food, habits of life and thought constitute the various races of men—this is the theory of those who accept the Bible as authority on the subject; second, the polygenists, who insist not only on one act of creation, but upon a number of independent creations, "each giving birth to essential, unchangeable peculiarities of a separate race, thus constituting a diversity of species with primal adaptation to their geographical distribution;" third, the evolutionists, who believe all existing species are but developments of pre-existing and lower forms of life; which, in their turn, were but developments of still lower forms, and so on back, back until you reach the spontaneous generation of the lowest types of vegetable and animal life, "as the accumulation of mold upon food, the swarming of maggots in meat, * * * the generation of insect life in decaying vegetable substances, the birth of one form arising out of the decay of another; the slow and gradual unfolding from a lower to a higher sphere, acting through a long succession of ages, culminating in the grandeur of intellectual manhood."

Of these theories the first and last only need detain us; and since the theory of evolution is the one more generally accepted by scientific men, and is making rapid progress among the masses, I think it proper to state the basis of this theory more in detail.

The absurdities which theologians have associated with the first named hypothesis of the origin of man and the universe is largely responsible for the existence of the theory of evolution. Finding so much that was contrary to well known facts, not so much in the theory itself, as in the explanations of it by its advocates, induced men of intelligence to look for some other explanation of the genesis of things.

It was doubtless observed that many remarkable resemblances exist between man and the inferior animals. In embryonic development, in physical structure, in material composition and the functions of organs, man and the superior animals are strikingly alike. The skeleton of man when examined minutely and compared with the skeletons of the higher order of animals, seems only a modification of them, and in some instances the modifications appear extremely slight. This resemblance also exists among the inferior animals, and it was this, doubtless, which gave birth to the idea of a common origin for all existing species.

Side by side with the above mentioned facts are others that sustain, it is claimed, the idea of common origin; and suggest an explanation of how the varieties of animal and vegetable forms were brought into existence. The great law of nature is for like to beget like; the tendency of offspring is always to reproduce the parent forms, as every seed produces its kind; that is the general law of nature, and to it a special name is given—it is called atavism. But notwithstanding this general law, there is a modification of it, a tendency to variation, slight in some cases and more marked in others. This is a matter of common observation. The male does not follow the precise type of the male parent, nor does the female always inherit the precise characteristics of the mother. "There are all sorts of intermixtures and intermediate conditions between the two, where complexion, or beauty, or fifty other different peculiarities belonging to either side of the house, are reproduced in other members of the same family." This kind of variation in cases where offspring are produced by sexual propagation is attributed to the fact that the thing propagated proceeds from two organisms of different sexes and temperaments. Breeders of our domestic animals take advantage of this tendency to variation, to produce such varieties as are most desirable; and, indeed, for that matter, to obtain new varieties by crossing breeds. Sometimes this tendency to variation acts in the most remarkable and unaccountable manner, and because naturalists can assign no reason for it, they have called it "spontaneous variation." That it may be understood I quote instances of such variation from Professor Huxley:

Reaumur, a famous French naturalist, in an essay on variation, relates a remarkable case of spontaneous variation which came under his observation in the person of a Maltese, of the name of Gratio Kelleia, who was born with six fingers upon each hand, and the like number of toes upon each of his feet. His parents, of course, were ordinary five-fingered persons. This was a case then of "spontaneous generation;" and subsequent circumstances in connection with this case prove there is a tendency in nature to perpetuate these variations. Gratio Kelleia married, when he was twenty-two years of age, an ordinary five-fingered lady. The result of that marriage was four children. The first, Salvator, had six fingers and six toes, like the father; the second, George, had five fingers and toes; but one of them was deformed, showing a tendency to variation; the third, Andre, had five fingers and five toes perfect; the fourth, a girl, Marie, had five fingers and five toes, but her thumbs were deformed, showing a tendency towards the sixth. These children grew up and when they came to adult years married, and of course it happened that they all married five- fingered and five-toed persons. Now let us see what happened. Salvator had four children, they were two boys, a girl and another boy: the first two boys and the girl were six-fingered and six-toed, like their grandfather; the fourth child had only five fingers and five toes. George had four children. There were two girls with six fingers and six toes; there was one girl with six fingers and five toes on the right side, and five fingers and five toes on the other; the fourth, a boy, had five fingers and five toes. The third son of Gratio Kelleia, Andre, it will be remembered, was perfectly well formed, and he had many children whose hands and feet were regularly developed. Marie, the last, whose thumbs were deformed, married a man with five fingers and toes: they had four children; the first was born with six toes, but the other children were normal.

In this case of Gratio Kelleia and his children is seen the tendency to reproduce the parent stock, and also to perpetuate the variation which so unaccountably appeared. That tendency to perpetuate the variation was very strong, even though these persons with the six fingers and toes, or who only inherited the deformity in part, intermarried with persons ordinarily formed. What would have been the result had the two eldest boys of Salvator taken it into their heads to marry their first cousins, the two first girls of George? It will be remembered that these were all of the abnormal type of their grandfather. Is it not most likely that had these people married and their descendants continued to intermarry with each other, that a new variety of men having six fingers and six toes would have been the result? The second case I quote from Huxley gives us every reason to believe that such would have been the result:

In the year 1791 there was a farmer of the name of Seth Wright, in Massachusetts, who had a flock of sheep, consisting of a ram and some twelve or fifteen ewes. Of the flock of ewes, one at the breeding-time bore a lamb which was singularly formed; it had a very long body, very short legs, and those legs were bowed. In the part of Massachusetts where Seth Wright lived, the fields were separated by fences, and his sheep, which were active and robust, would roam abroad, and without much difficulty would jump over the fences into other people's farms. As a matter of course this gave rise to all sorts of quarrels, bickerings and contention among the farmers of the neighborhood; so it occurred to Seth Wright, if he could obtain a breed of sheep with bandy legs like the one which had so strangely appeared in his flock, it would be to his advantage, as they would not be able to jump over the fences so readily. He acted upon that idea. He killed his old ram, and as soon as the young one arrived at maturity he bred exclusively from him. The result was that all the offspring were like the male parent or female parent, there was no mixing in the offspring the peculiarities of the parents, they were either pure "Ancons" —the name given to the new variety—or pure, ordinary sheep. In consequence of this the farmer in a very few years was able to get a considerable flock of this short-legged variety of sheep and a large number of them were soon scattered throughout Massachusetts. Here is the case then where the tendency to perpetuate a variation culminated in the production of a new variety. And, indeed, this is what is perpetually going on with our domesticated animals,—by what we may call selective breeding; and it is going on, it is claimed by evolutionists, in a natural state, that is, where man's interference does not effect it; in other words, variations are perpetuated by means of what Mr. Darwin has called "natural selection."

Suppose, for instance, that by one of those unaccountable freaks of nature a "spontaneous variation" is produced, as in the case of Seth Wright's sheep; and further suppose that the particular characteristic which distinguished it from the parent stock was favorable to its persistence, by that I mean that the particulars in which it varies from the parent stock will enable the animal, if it be a beast of prey, to secure its food more surely either by an increase of fleetness or stealth, by which it would the more surely run down, or steal upon its victims, and in either case be more sure of its food and hence more secure of existence than the stock from which it came; and if the means of subsistence for these animals were limited, then the variety having the peculiarity of fleetness or stealth would be preserved and perpetuate the peculiarities imparted to it originally by "spontaneous variation," while the original stock would perish. Thus, as evolutionists would say, the fittest would survive in this struggle for existence; and thus the original variation would be preserved and perpetuated and a new variety brought into existence as effectually by this natural means of selection as if man had superintended it for his own benefit. That individuals in organic forms increase in a proportion greater than the provisional means of support is a theory pretty well demonstrated; there is, therefore, a constant struggle for existence in nature, in which the strongest, those best fitted to live and improve their species, prevail. Every variation, therefore, that is favorable to races of plants or animals is seized upon by this principle of natural selection and preserved.

Another way of preserving variations is by what our latter-day naturalists call "sexual selection." "Throughout nature," say they, "the male is the wooer; he it is who is armed for fight, and provided with musical organs and ornamental appendages, with which to charm the fair one. The savage and the wild beast alike secure their mate over the mangled form of a vanquished rival. In this manner the more highly favored of either sex are mated, and natural selections made by which better ever producing better, the species in its constant variation is constantly improved."