MAN AND THE APE.

Hokitika Guardian, 17 October 1925, Page 4

MAN AND THE APE.

11l I "IT I V. FANATICISM. (Professor (k Elliot Smith F.K.5..) It. is still supposed, even Tv Homy educated people, that the doctrine of evolution is merely a matter of opinion. and that there 'is still room for honest- don hi whether the descent man from lower animals is true or false. It cannot he ton I rongly emphasis,■<! that pi modi .'u scholars the reality ol evolution is as iirtain ii« the I act. of ih" canid- ew.liiucn around the sun. I lie great antiipuly of mankind and kinship with nihe-r living creature. s arias essential a part of biological thought as Iho movements of the earth are of astronomy. I liml it clinic-nit to put niysell i-i the position of those who rdUse i . admit tin- tael of maids lies, out from the lower animals. Tin- strucluro ol the human body i ... nearly identical with I hat of tiie apes as In make it altogether onLliinkahla- that man and I li" tine- ace mil tin- muddied descendants of a common Simian aiice-ter. even if we .have to push, their pedigrees b.-n-l: for millions ol year, to an ivy at their common parent. , COXCHET F FVIDXKCE . Pul it is not ini-ivlv identity o! sit act are that* for* es this truth upon | its. lii tie- lionian 1..>,i> ik. re :• riseores of vestigial structures, many of them i.oit unite useless, like ntiiscles to move a tail that no longer exists, which are dearly survivals from sonic ancestor in whom tiie.se things had a useful function to perform. The study of the development of the human infant when compared with that of other living creature-, affords a positive demonstration of the fact of evolution in the ease of every human being horn into the world. Since the time of Darwin new trad important facts in enrroborat ion of mint’s evolution have come to light. The reactions of the blood ot nn-ii and ape< reveal the fact that there i- what may he called a positive blondkinship between them. The apes are liable to contract human diseases from which other living creatures are immune. f Then, again, the sort r-f evidence ' that in these days naturally springs to the mind of most people when eroln- , tion is untier discussion—the fossil re- : mains of extinct types of men and

apes—has been lec-avered for the mc.-t part since f'baric- Dadv.io wrote “The Deuce lit of Alan.” Our biological laboratories evorv day bring forth new facts in confirmation of the reality oi ; man's pedigree and descent from n primitive ai>e. whose oilier descendants are the gorilla and chimpanzee. I he Tauugs ape recently discovered by Professor Dart in Heeknnuniand affords definite clues to the earliest phase in tin? process of transformation in the direction of man. i BITTED PERSECUTION. Tko reality of evolution was firmly

implanted in my mind as a child, and the conviction of its truth has been impressed upon me by daily observation ever since then. Hence ntv difficulty in putting myself in the position of those vvlio still doubt.

A study of the controversies of the sixties and "seventies of last century, however, has helped he in some measure to realise how difficult, a struggle ii was, even lor men who had the necessary technical knowledge, to readjust their hearings and accept the new interpretation ol their evidence ilint seems so plain to us who have grown up in the light of Darwin's and Huxley's teaeh-

ISut the world-wide discussion of tiitv years ago should have settled the essential issue for all time, and satisfied even the most insatiable appetite for heresy hunting.

Tennessee, of all places, should have learnt the hitter lesson of the futility of persecuting truth. In 187 S tli: Yaiidrri.il! I'liiversilv ol that Slat.expelled Professor Winchell for expressing the .lew that the facts of geology as well as the information being brought to light in Kgvpt and Jinbvlonia, proved the existence of mankind long before the period commonly ascribed to Adam.

The episcopal representative of the university who framed the indictment seems to have been troubled with an uneasy conscience: for he blurted out tlie clumsy condemnation of his own huk of frankness when he said. "V.Vdo not propose to treat you as the f ll .position treated tlalileo."

Professor Yi’inehell truly reminded him that, "what you propose is the same iliing; it is ecclesiastical proscription for an opinion width must he settled by scientific evidence.” I’.nt this action did m l harm tb" distinguished scientist, cr the cause he bad at heart. He secured a belter position with greater inflm no--. and the hollowness of the opposition to evolution was exposed under eirenmstattces that afforded the cause of truth the widest, pahlb-ity. Tl'e only dam-

age done was to the reputation of the Yanerbill I’liiversit v. try i\t; to M : :rm; tiii tii.

Tli is was- no isolated im-ideiii. Sr'res of similar leveiils happened during that deeaib- in the Old World as well as in the Xow, and the cause of intellectual freedom was advanced i.v tho-e who in llTeir blindness and fanaticism were

e,Adapting to let ter truth. It must not ho assumed that all the clergy in I hose limes were guilty of

such Mind lolly. Hi almost every Christ iati denomination there were men who clearly realised bow false to their tins! such championship of error was. While certain men of science like Dtuvs n and Mivan were allowing theological considerations to obscure the clear light of patent facts an eminent mem-I--I- of iho Romon Catholic ( bpreli in America was proclaiming that •‘the doctrine of evolnlion is no more t;t oppositi in to the doelrine of the Catholic Chttreli than is the Ccpernieun t henry or t hat ol' (inlilee.”

A I have said already, the fact < evolution is a-, surely established as tli knowledge I'mi the earth revivi a round the sun.