the ground of observation from one field of observation to another to make this statement; and when the assertions go so far as to exclude from the domain of science those who will not be dragged into this mire of mere assertion, then it is time to protest."

JUMPING OVERBOARD.

With equal vehemence against this doctrine of evolution Hugh Miller, Faraday, Brewster, Dana, Dawson, and hundreds of scientists in this country and other countries have made protest. I know that the few men who have adopted the theory make more noise than the thousands who have rejected it. The Bothnia of the Cunard Line took five hundred passengers safely from New York to Liverpool. Not one of the five hundred made any excitement. But after we had been four days out, one morning we found on deck a man's hat, coat, vest and boots, implying that some one had jumped overboard. Forthwith we all began to talk about that one man. There was more talk about that one man overboard than all the five hundred passengers that rode on in safety. "Why did he jump overboard?" "I wonder when he jumped overboard?” "I wonder if when he jumped overboard he would like to have jumped back again?" "I wonder if a fish caught him, or whether he went clear down to the bottom of the sea?" And for three or four days afterwards we talked about that poor man.

Here is the glorious and magnificent theory that God by His omnipotent power made man, by His omnipotent power made the brute creation, and by His omnipotent power made all worlds, and five thousand scientists have taken passage on board that magnificent theory, but ten or fifteen have jumped overboard. They make more talk than all the five thousand that did not jump. I am politely asked to jump with them. Thank you, gentlemen, I am very much obliged to you. I think I shall stick to the old Cunarder. If you want to jump overboard, jump, and test for yourselves whether your hand was really a fish's fin, and whether

you were web-footed originally, and whether your lungs were a swim-bladder. And as in every experiment there must be a division of labor, some who experiment and some who observe, you make the experiment and I will observe!

ONE OF THE TENETS.

There is one tenet of evolution which it is demanded we adopt, that which Darwin calls "Natural Selection," and that which Wallace calls the "Survival of the Fittest." By this they mean that the human race and the brute creation are all the time improving because the weak die and the strong live. Those who do not die survive because they are the fittest. They say the breed of sheep and cattle and dogs and men is all the time naturally improving. No need of God or Bible or religion, but just natural progress.

You see the race started with "spontaneous generation," and then it goes right on until Darwin can take us up with his "natural selection," and Wallace can take us up with his "survial of the fittest," and so we go right on up forever. Beautiful! But do the fittest survive? Garfield dead in September-Guiteau surviving until the following June. "Survival of the fittest?" Ah! no. The martyrs, religious and political, dying for their principles, their bloody persecutors living on to old age. "Survival of the fittest?" Five hundred thousand brave Northern men marching out to meet five hundred thousand brave Southern men, and die on the battle-field for a principle. Hundreds of thousands of them went down into the grave trenches. We stayed at home in comfortable quarters. Did they die because they were not as fit to live as we who survived? Ah! no; not the 66 survival of the fittest." Ellsworth and Nathaniel Lyon falling on the Northern side. Albert Sidney Johnston and Stonewall Jackson falling on the Southern side. Did they fall because they were not as fit to live as the soldiers and the generals who came back in safety? No. Bitten with the frosts of the second death be the tongue that dares utter it! It is not the "survival of the fittest.'

How has it been in the families of the world? How was it with the child physically the strongest, intellectually the brightest, in disposition the kindest? Did that child die because it was not as fit to live as those of your family that survived? Not "the survival of the fittest." In all communities some of the noblest, grandest men dying in youth, or in mid life, while some of the meanest and most contemptible live on to old age. Not the "survival of the fittest."

NO NATURAL PROGRESS.

But to show you that this doctrine is antagonistic to the Bible and to common-sense I have only to prove to you that there has been no natural progress. Vast improvement from another source, but, mind you, no natural progress. Where, where is the fine horse in any of our parks whose picture of eye and mane and nostril and neck and haunches are worthy of being compared to Job's picture of a horse as he, thousands of years ago, heard it paw and neigh and champ its bit for the battle? Pigeons of to-day not so wise as the carrier pigeons of five hundred years ago-pigeons that carried the mails from army to army and from city to city; one of them flung into the sky at Rome or Venice landing without ship or rail train in London.

And as to the human race, so far as mere natural progress is concerned, it started with men ten feet high; now the average is about five feet six inches. It started with men living two hundred, four hundred, eight hundred, nine hundred years, and now thirty years is more than the average of human life. Mighty progress we have made, haven't we? I went into the cathedral at York, England, and the best artists in England had just been painting a window in that cathedral, and right beside it was a window painted four hundred years ago, and there is not a man on earth but would say that the modern painting of the window by the best artists of England is not worthy of being compared with the painting of four hundred years ago right beside it. Vast improvement, as I shall show you in a minute or two, but no natural evolution.

EVOLUTION DOWNWARD.

I tell you, my friends, that natural evolution is not upward, but is always downward. Hear Christ's account of it. Fifteenth Matthew and nineteenth verse: "Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.' This is what Christ said of Evolution. Give natural evolution full swing in our world and it will evolve into two hemispheres of crime, two hemi-, spheres of penitentiary, two hemispheres of lazaretto, two hemispheres of brothel. New Yorks Tombs; Moyamensing Prison, Philadelphia; Seven Dials, London; and Cowgate, Edinburgh; only festering carbuncles on the face and neck of natural evolution. See what the Bible says about the heart, and then what evolution says about the heart. Evolution says, "better and better and better gets the heart by natural improvement." The Bible says: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. Who can know it?" When you can evolve fragrance from malodor, and oratorio from a buzz-saw, and fall pippins from a basket of decayed crab apples, then you can by natural evolution from the human heart develop goodness. Ah! my friends, evolution is always downward; never upward.

BIBLE EVOLUTION.

I am not a pessimist, but an optimist. I do not believe everything is going to destruction; I believe everything is going on to redemption. But it will not be through the infidel doctrine of evolution, but through our glorious Christianity, which has effected all the good that has ever been wrought and which is yet to reconstruct all the nations.

Away with your rotten, deceptive, infidel, and blasphemous evolution, and give us the Bible, salvation through Jesus Christ our Lord.

"Salvation! let the echo fly

The spacious earth around,
Till all the armies of the sky
Conspire to raise the sound."

MODERN EVOLUTIONISTS.

Oh, it makes me sick to see these literary fops going along with a copy of Darwin under one arm and a case of transfixed grasshoppers and butterflies under the other arm, telling about the "survival of the fittest," and Huxley's protoplasm, and the nebular hypothesis.

As near as I can tell, evolutionists seem to think that God at the start had not made up His mind as to exactly what He would make, and so He has been changing it all through

the ages.

Evolution is one great mystery; it hatches out fifty mysteries, and the fifty hatch out a thousand, and the thousand hatch out a million. Why, my brother, not admit the one great mystery of God, and have that settle all the other mysteries? I can more easily appreciate the fact that God by one stroke of his omnipotence could make man than I could realize how out of five millions of ages He could have evolved one, putting on a little here and a little there. It would have been just as great a miracle for God to have turned an orang-outang into a man as to make a man out and out-the one job just as big as the other.

It seems to me we had better let God have a little place in our world somewhere. It seems to me if we cannot have Him make all creatures, we had better have Him make two or three. There ought to be some place where He could stay without interfering with the evolutionists. "No," says Darwin. And so for years he is trying to make fan-tailed pigeons into some other kind of pigeon, or to have them go into something that is not a pigeon-turning them into quail, or barnyard fowl, or brownthresher. But pigeon it is. And others have tried with the ox and the dog and the horse, but they stayed in their species. If they attempt to cross over, it is a hybrid, and a hybrid is always sterile and goes into extinction. There has been only one successful attempt to pass over from speechless animal to the articulation of man, and that was the attempt which Balaam witnessed