And further:--

"_That the simplest and most primitive type, under a law to

which that of like production is subordinate, gave birth to the

type next above it; that this again produced the next higher,

and so on to the very highest_, the stages of advance being in

all cases very small, namely, from one species to another; so

that the phenomenon has always been of a simple and modest

character."

In a Sequel which the author wrote, in answer to the numerous attacks

made upon him, he has the following:--

"The probable fact is, that the modification takes place in an

offshoot of the original tribe, which has removed into a

different set of circumstances, these circumstances being the

cause of the change; thus there is no need to presume that the

original tribe is at all affected by any such modification."

The author thus supposes that the variations among animals were

periodical and sudden, the results of some peculiar impetus given at

special periods. Later knowledge--the study of nature by the light of

greater experience--has exposed many errors in this work. Its crudities

have been made apparent; but the thought which pervaded it was

intrinsically right. The last passage quoted above foreshadows the more

elaborate speculations of the later philosopher.

In 1859 appeared Darwin's work, "On the Origin of Species, by Means of

Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle

for Life." Like its predecessors, it was a firebrand thrown into the

scientific camp. Like his predecessors, the author drew down obloquy and

anathemas from the clergy, sarcasm and vituperation from the laity, and

a host of replies from writers of all grades. Like his predecessor, the

author of the "Vestiges," he might have said, in the words of Agassiz:--

"The history of the sciences is present to tell us that there

are few of the great truths now recognized which have not been

treated as chimerical and blasphemous before they were

demonstrated."

Darwin, as he himself tells us in his Preface, spent twenty years in a

patient, laborious study of nature, having special reference to this

topic,--the origin of species. Certain observations made in the course

of his explorations in South America led him to the convictions which

subsequent study only strengthened; and, after having spent years in the

collection of facts bearing upon the subject, he gave his theory to the

world in the volume mentioned, which was merely a digest of the facts.

It is perhaps needless to say, that Charles Darwin is a naturalist of

the highest rank; that he stands among the foremost men of the day as a

clear-minded, trustworthy, accurate, profound thinker.

The Darwinian theory is erected on the primary foundation of a natural

law acting through all time,--a persistent force which is applied to all

creation, immutable, unceasing, eternal; which determined the

revolutions of the igneous vapor out of which worlds were first evolved;

which determines now the color and shape of a rose-bud, the fall of the

summer leaves, the course of a rippling brook, the sparkle of a diamond;

which gives light to the sun and beauty to a woman's eye. It rejects

utterly the idea of special creation, and maintains that the globe, as

it exists to-day with all its myriad inhabitants, is only one phase of

that primeval vapor which by the force of that law has reached its

present state. As a little microscopic egg becomes in time a full-grown,

living, breathing, loving animal by the operation of natural laws which

we term growth, so has the universe, with its denizens, become what it

is by the workings of Natural Law.

The precise process by which sentient existence first became evolved

from inorganic matter seems to be beyond the scrutiny of man. It is so

far without the scope of his experience, his speculation even, that it

is futile to attempt to surmise it; although certain interesting

phenomena have attended the experiments of naturalists, especially those

of Professor Jeffries Wyman. Darwin takes the subject up at the

appearance of animal life, and seeks to work out the causes of the

present variation among animals, and to detect the _modus operandi_ by

which the law of evolution has produced the multiform changes now

apparent. "Natural Selection" is his password into the great workshop of

Nature. The three great agencies at work there are the tendency of all

animals to transmit their peculiarities to their offspring, the tendency

of all animals to vary from their ancestors under varying influences

around them, and the constant changes taking place in their

surroundings. "Natural Selection" are the words chosen to express the

action of animals under these conflicting forces. The power of external

influence upon structure is exhibited in the remarkable results of man's

treatment of plants and animals. The varieties of pears and apples are

of his producing; and the different breeds of domestic animals are the

direct consequences of his influence. The most astonishing instance of

his power is shown in pigeons, which are made, by skilful breeders, to

assume a great variety of shapes, colors, and habits. To what is this

change due? If a rock-pigeon were left to itself, it would produce only

rock-pigeons, unless some new influences were brought to bear by natural

causes. Man gives a rock-pigeon some peculiar food, subjects it to some

peculiar treatment, and the creature begins at once to change; that is,

to accommodate itself to the new circumstances by which it is

surrounded. The plastic nature undergoes an alteration correspondent to

the new state of existence. In a few generations these varieties are

indefinitely multiplied; and then, by crossing these varieties, new ones

are again produced. What is then the state of affairs? We have a series

of birds which, were they discovered in new countries, would be

considered to be new species. They differ in shape and color, in the

number of their vertebrae and ribs, the number of wing and tail feathers,

the number of scales on their toes, and various other anatomical

peculiarities. Here then is proof that animals, when exposed to

influences different from those which surrounded their ancestors, take

on new forms and characteristics. This is man's work. But is not man one

of the many agents in the work of the Great Prime Mover? Let us suppose

that the peculiar circumstances which produced a pouter or a fan-tail

were to remain in force for centuries; would not pouters or fan-tails

continue to procreate, and thus a new species be added to the genus?

What, then, becomes of special creation of every species of animal, if

man in a few years can produce a dozen forms out of one, any one of

which dozen is so distinct as to be deemed a new species, were it

Nature's work and not man's? The fact is thus demonstrated that animals

become varied in accordance with variations in their surroundings. This

simple fact, once substantiated, is the key to the whole subject. Man's

influence ceases when he leaves the animal to itself. But Nature never

leaves the animal to itself. Her changes are slight and slow; but they

never go back. They are permanent, only to be reaffected as the

environment alters. When we consider the incalculable, inconceivable

lapse of time through which organic life has been swayed by the

never-ceasing action of the forces around it, we can imagine what a vast

variety of animal forms may have been evolved from some one primal

ancestor.

Darwin endeavors to explain, in detail, how this differentiation takes

place. The largest or strongest get the best food or the most attractive

females, and then transmit their strength or their peculiarities to

their progeny. These peculiarities are the results of the environment,

and if this shall go on changing in the direction of these

peculiarities, they will increase. Suppose that the climate should

gradually grow colder; the result might be a denser growth of hair.

Those which, by strength or otherwise, chanced to have denser hair than

others, would more readily endure the change, and would transmit the

habit to their young; others less fitted to endure the change would die

out. In a short time the young would be born with the dense hair, as it

is well known that any new habit assumed by animals is exhibited earlier

and earlier in the young, as long as it is a necessity of life. These

variations are never due to one single cause. Organized life is wrought

upon by a wonderfully complex web of influences. Darwin has the

following passage touching the action of vegetable and animal life upon

each other.

"In Staffordshire, on the estate of a relation where I had ample means

of investigation, there was a large and extremely barren heath, which

had never been touched by the hand of man; but several hundred acres of

exactly the same nature had been enclosed twenty-five years previously,

and planted with Scotch fir. The change in the native vegetation of the

planted part of the heath was most remarkable,--more than is generally

seen in passing from one quite different soil to another; not only the

proportional numbers of the heath plants were wholly changed, but twelve

species of plants (not counting grasses and carices) flourished in the

plantations, which could not be found on the heath. The effect on the

insects must have been still greater, for six insectivorous birds were

very common in the plantations which were not to be seen on the heath;

and the heath was frequented by two or three distinct insectivorous

birds. Here we see how potent has been the effect of the introduction of

a single tree, nothing whatever else having been done, with the

exception that the land had been enclosed, so that cattle could not

enter. But how important an element enclosure is, I plainly saw near

Farnham in Surrey. Here there are extensive heaths, with a few clumps of

old Scotch firs on the distant hill-tops; within the last ten years

large spaces have been enclosed, and self-sown firs are now springing up

in multitudes, so close together that all cannot live. When I

ascertained that these young trees had not been sown or planted, I was

so much surprised at their numbers that I went to several points of

view, whence I could examine hundreds of acres of the unenclosed heath,

and, literally, I could not see a single Scotch fir, except the old

planted clumps. But on looking closely between the stems of the heath, I

found multitudes of seedlings and little trees, which had been

perpetually browsed down by the cattle. In one square yard, at a point

some hundred yards distant from one of the old clumps, I counted

thirty-two little trees; and one of them, judging from the rings of

growth, had during twenty-six years tried to raise its head above the

stems of the heath, and had failed. No wonder that, as soon as the land

was enclosed, it became thickly clothed with vigorously growing young

firs. Yet the heath was so barren and so extensive that no one would

ever have imagined that cattle would have so closely and effectually

searched it for food.

"Here we see that cattle absolutely determine the existence of the

Scotch fir; but in several parts of the world insects determine the

existence of cattle. Perhaps Paraguay offers the most curious instance

of this; for here neither cattle nor horses nor dogs have ever run wild,

though they swarm southward and northward in a feral state; and Azara

and Rengger have shown that this is caused by the greater number in

Paraguay of a certain fly, which lays its eggs in the navels of these

animals when first born. The increase of these flies, numerous as they

are, must be habitually checked by some means, probably by birds. Hence

if certain insectivorous birds (whose numbers are probably regulated by

hawks or beasts of prey) were to increase in Paraguay, the flies would

decrease,--then cattle and horses would become feral; and this would

certainly greatly alter (as indeed I have observed in parts of South

America) the vegetation: this, again, would largely affect the insects;

and this, as we just have seen in Staffordshire, the insectivorous

birds, and so onwards in ever-increasing circles of complexity."

In the struggle for life, the strongest live; or, in other words, those

best fitted to live in the environment endure. Animals and plants

produce in vast excess of the possibility of life. A destruction of life

is going on to an almost incredible amount. Were this not the case, the

slowest breeders in existence would soon cover the earth so as to occupy

every inch of space. Darwin reckons that the elephant, the slowest

breeder, if allowed to go on unchecked, and to live his allotted term of

years, would in five centuries produce fifteen millions of elephants

from one pair. If every cod's egg had developed into a full-grown fish,

the whole ocean would, ages ago, have been packed with them, like

herrings in a box. In this destruction, the weaker animals and

plants--those least fitted to thrive under the influences around--become

the prey of others better fitted for the struggle, or die of their own

lack of assimilative force. Thus, through untold ages of shifting

outward circumstances, the plastic forms of organic life have been

remoulded. A little obscure plant, the food of an insect, dies out; the

insect itself, deprived of its food, dies out or migrates; the bird

which fed upon it dies out or migrates; the bird of prey follows the

like course. Migration introduces them to an entirely new state of

existence, temperature, food, and antagonists. The migrating animals are

replaced by others, which likewise experience new surroundings; and thus

the extirpation of a single plant may determine a long series of

changes. Instances of this kind are not uncommon. What must these

changes have been throughout the remote ages which have turned sea-shore

mud into uplifted mountain chains, and sunk long-stretching, sunny hills

into the ocean depths!

Darwin constructs his theory of gradual differentiation on the evidence

thus obtained. He takes a given specific animal form, and supposes that,

owing to some external change in a given locality, it takes on some

correspondent variation. But all of the individuals of the species may

not be likewise affected. The circumstances may alter in one place and

not in another. The result will be two varieties of animal. The variety

goes on increasing in diversity, while the original still continues to

produce its like. By and by the variety, having a greater tendency to

vary, from its having already done so, undergoes a new differentiation,

the difference being, in all cases, slight, and the time between the

periods of maximum change being hundreds, thousands of years. One of the

new varieties may by peculiar circumstances take on a special amplitude

of growth, while the other, peculiarly circumstanced, may be contracted

and dwarfed. One of the original varieties may by this time have

disappeared. The original itself may have disappeared. Thus the

connecting link between the two forms is lost. The more individualized

form may go on accenting its own peculiar characters, and again be

broken into new varieties, some of which may retain the old characters

in circumscribed areas, while others may increase in greater abundance

and occupy a much wider area. The wider the field of life, the more

numerous the differing influences and the more diverse the conditions

the animal must undergo. Thence arise more differentiations. After the

lapse of some millions of ages, these constantly forking growths will

have taken on a diversity to which that of the pouters and fan-tails is

trifling.

Some forms may be less plastic than others, and give way less readily to

the incident forces. These may remain unchanged for a far longer period

than subsequent varieties, and be coexistent with them. Some varieties

may take on a cerebral growth as widely different and as strongly

individualized as frame structure. Man himself is a striking instance.

The Negro, the Malay, the Mongolian, are almost precisely what they were

five thousand years ago. The Bushman, the Hottentot, the Patagonian, and

the Digger Indian are to-day not much above the animals about them;

while the Caucasian has gone on in a wonderful advancement, leaving the

other races in the same state of development in which they were when the

Caucasian was no farther advanced than they. And here is perhaps the

place to allude to the derisive objection to Darwinism, that it makes

man an improved monkey. Darwin's theory certainly gives to both some

vastly remote common ancestor; but it does not maintain the

metamorphosis of one into the other. It does not suppose that man was

once a gorilla. It supposes that from out of some of the

differentiations of some animal form arose the first man-like creature,

and that, gradually changing, like other animal forms, some of the

varieties eventually evolved into apes and orangoutangs, to stop there

and die out like hosts of other forms now extinct. But from some

strongly individualized variety sprang, with more rapid and advancing

growth, the primitive man, who has, under complex influences,

differentiated into the so-called races of mankind. We talk of man as

being something infinitely above all animals. There is a vast difference

between the highest and lowest species of the genus _homo_. Were the

race confined to those lowest species, we imagine that European and

American pride of nature would go before a grievous fall. These

constantly succeeding changes are supposed to have taken place during

the whole time that this earth has been fitted for animal life,--a

period of time so long that the human mind is unable to grasp it.

One objection to this theory, strongly insisted on, is the absence of

any evidence of connecting links between man and the lower animals, or

between the strongly defined demarcations of the animal orders. The

answer to this is, that little is known of the whole earth: much of it

is submerged now that was once above the waters and served for a

dwelling-place for organized beings. A great deal is known of the

sequence of forms which have been unearthed from their stony sepulchres.

The negative evidence is as weighty as the positive. Besides this,

millions of air-breathing animals die, without leaving anything behind

them to mark their existence. Preyed upon by other animals, devoured at

their death by myriads of insects, exposed to the action of destructive

chemical agents, they soon decay, and leave no trace behind. Who ever

finds the dead bodies of the thousands of animals and birds which perish

yearly? Who finds the remains of the familiar creatures which frequent

our woods and meadows? For one which is accidentally buried so as to

resist the destructive forces of air and water, millions are resolved

into their primitive elements, and are annihilated as structural forms.

And yet, because in portions of the vast deposits of rock the remains of

certain ancient forms are discovered, it is asked that the Darwinians

should furnish a perfect progressive sequence of fossils to elucidate

the theory, and prove it beyond dispute. Recent discoveries have brought

to light human remains in caves, where they are associated with bones of

extinct animals. That they are of very ancient origin is beyond

doubt,--older than any civilization, as we understand the term. But even

they are doubtless modern, when we take into consideration the time that

the earth has been as it now is. How many thousands of ages has it taken

the Niagara Falls to cut their way through the solid rock back from

Ontario to Erie? It is highly probable that the earth has been

approximately the same as it now is for many millions of years. Reaching

still farther back into the past, before this state of comparative

quiescence, can we not find adequate time for the gradual succession of

organized beings on this earth, and for the structural differentiations

which have finally resulted in the present position of things? Because

we see one day succeed another with no change in the organic life

around, because the written history of man records no vital change in

his structure, men deny the possibility of antecedent variation. Man's

written history is a thing of to-day. The builders of the Pyramids were

our brothers. The five thousand years which have elapsed since the

cultivated civilization of Egypt are but a day to the previous ages upon

ages of man's existence before that civilization was dreamed of. The

bones of untold myriads of human kind crumbled into dust before Egypt

saw the rudest mud-hut that foreshadowed the temples of her prime.

The imperfectness of the geological record is certainly a great

hindrance to the exact proof of the Darwinian theory, and is a strong

weapon in the hands of its opponents. But while so much of the dim,

remote past is attainable only by inference and deduction, the argument

is decisive for neither side. One weighty argument for the Darwinians is

the general plan upon which animals are constructed. All vertebrates

have the same typical form. Take off the skins from some dozen

air-breathing vertebrates, place the bodies in an upright attitude, and

they are in general structure identical. The position of the head, eyes,

and ears, the neck, the central vertebral column, the fore legs, which

are arms in that position, the pelvis, the hind legs, all bear a close

resemblance. Of course there are material differences; but they are

evidently moulded upon one general plan. If there were a special

creation for each species, why should they all necessarily have a

kindred structure? To be sure the question may be answered, that they

might as well be similar as dissimilar. But how much more in consonance

with the known action of natural laws is it, to suppose that from some

original type these various forms have gradually differentiated into

their present diversity of structure; the original typical plan, the

least variable characteristic, having maintained its individuality,

while the more plastic appendages have been swayed by incident forces.

This will logically and naturally account for the unlikeness, and yet

the resemblance.

The Darwinian theory then is, that Natural Law or Persistent Force,

acting through all time upon the universe, has evolved from certain

primitive organic forms of a very low order of existence the present

diversified races on the earth. It does not stop here. With the eye of

prescience it sees the process going on far into the ages yet to come.

What may be the result in that distant day, finite speculation may not

determine. But the laws which have swayed the world sway it still, and

will sway it forevermore. As in the past they have evolved order out of

disorder, heterogeneous beauty out of homogeneous crudity, progressive

individuality of being and thought out of chaotic vapor, so will they

continue their evolving force through all time, till the boasted

perfectness of this day of ours, perfect because it is our day, will be

as primitive to the later denizens of this globe as the barbarity of the

cave savages is to modern civilization.

A host of noble minds, each in its own peculiar province, is exploring

the vast field of knowledge. Darwin, Spencer, Huxley, Tyndal, Lyell,

Hooker, and many others, are giving their profound thought to the

elucidation of the laws which govern the vast universe of which they are

a part. Their intellects touch the scarce-seen planets; they turn over

the stony pages of earth's autobiography; they anatomize to their

ultimate atoms the structure of its organisms; they use the intelligence

evolved from their own growth to search for the law which has determined

that evolution. And they speak out their convictions manfully and

earnestly. They proclaim what is to them a revelation of truth in the

records which the past and the present offer to their understanding.

Herbert Spencer thus maintains the necessity of the expression of man's

deepest convictions, in a passage instinct with nobleness of thought and

dignity of utterance:--

"Whoever hesitates to utter that which he thinks the highest truth, lest

it should be too much in advance of the time, may reassure himself by

looking at his acts from an impersonal point of view. Let him duly

realize the fact, that opinion is the agency through which character

adapts external arrangements to itself,--that his opinion rightly forms

part of this agency,--is a unit of force, constituting, with other such

units, the general power which works out social changes,--and he will

perceive that he may properly give full utterance to his innermost

conviction, leaving it to produce what effect it may. It is not for

nothing that he has in him these sympathies with some principles and

repugnance to others. He, with all his capacities and aspirations and

beliefs, is not an accident, but a product of the time. He must remember

that, while he is a descendant of the past, he is a parent of the

future; and that his thoughts are as children born to him, which he may

not carelessly let die. He, like every other man, may properly consider

himself as one of the myriad agencies through whom works the Unknown

Cause; and when the Unknown Cause produces in him a certain belief, he

is thereby authorized to profess and act out that belief. For, to render

in their highest sense the words of the poet,

'Nature is made better by no mean,

But nature makes that mean: over that art

Which you say adds to nature, is an art

That nature makes.'

"Not as adventitious, therefore, will the wise man regard the faith

which is in him. The highest truth he sees he will fearlessly utter;

knowing that, let what may come of it, he is thus playing his right part

in the world,--knowing that, if he can effect the change he aims at,

well: if not, well also, though not _so_ well."

The Atlantic Monthly, Volume 18, No. 108, October, 1866 A Magazine of Literature, Science, Art, and Politics · 第 14 / 28 题