ing some distance into the interior.

With the Man

dingos it is much the same. These two tribes are driving out the negroes that they may command certain positions on the river; the result of which is, that they are becoming negroes themselves.

"In the same manner the Fans, of the Sierra del Crystal, are taking possession of the lower Gaboon. There are now no black Fans. But they will be found there by future travelers.

"Sangnier, in his 'Voyage au Sénégal,' writes, "The Satinguets (African), people of Podor, toward the Senegal, are not as black as the other negroes, but coppercolored and red; their children, who come to the Senegal and dwell there for some time, have a skin much blacker than it was.'

"It frequently occurs, too, that families or tribes with negro characters are found under circumstances which render an intermixture of race impossible; the cause, therefore, can only be ascribed to physical influence.

"It has been frequently asserted that the Ethiopian can not change his skin; that Nature has placed, like a curse, an indelible stamp upon his form and features, which will never change, to whatever climate he may be borne.

"But proverbs are not arguments, nor assertions facts. That the type is stubborn I will allow, but I can not admit that it is permanent."

But it may be said that though certain changes in physical characteristics may have taken place in

the lapse of time, yet all the existing races had reached their present types at the very beginning of the historic period, within a very few centuries, at most, of the flood — a space much too short to have developed the differences between them. Representations both of men and animals are found on the oldest monuments of Egypt and Assyria, which show all the diversities now existing among different nations. Even then, if we concede the common origin of men, we are compelled to throw it so far back in time as to be wholly inconsistent with the Mosaic chronology.

To this allegation Dr. Bachman well replies. that the monumental figures referred to are too rude and imperfect to have any real value in the argument.

“ The reduced figures in Nott and Gliddon we have not compared with the originals. Taking them, however, just as they are presented to the reader, and presuming them to be faithful copies, we have no hesitation in saying that, for all the purposes of the naturalist in the designation of species or varieties, the figures of animals on the monuments are entirely valueless, and can not advance him a single step in a science which requires the closest accuracy. . . . Let us only look at the figures on a single page, the 388th of Nott and Gliddon's Types,' and then inquire what lights these would afford us in the

designation of species or varieties. If the upper figure is a greyhound, as is stated, it must be not only a new species, but a new genus, since we have evidently nothing in nature at the present day to correspond to it. If this is an accurate representation of the greyhound, as it then existed (with a short tail turned upward like that of the rabbit), it affords one of the strongest evidences of the changes which time has effected, since no such variety of greyhound exists in our day. We feel convinced that the ancient artists were no naturalists, and are inclined to the belief that they had no specimens before them to aid in their delineations - that with them a dog was a dog; and it now requires the aid of the imagination to decide on the variety. We feel no disposition in this place to enter on an investigation of those caricatures of dogs, as we are fully aware that the book of nature is a much safer guide to the naturalist in the investigation of species than the very imperfect and unsatisfactory figures on the monuments.

We may here observe that the figures of dogs and men (the latter only are of any scientific value) on the Eastern monuments have been carefully studied and delineated by master minds men at whose feet Gliddon has sat as a humble copyist. They have commenced giving to the world the result of their scientific researches. Both Lepsius and Bunsen have already proclaimed their belief in the doctrine of the unity of the human race. Thus these monumental records, which caused Gliddon to pronounce, in the

language of scorn and obloquy, a tirade against the Scriptures, convinced the minds of Lepsius and Bunsen. of their truth, and filled them with humility, reverence, and awe. Their scientific researches satisfied them of the doctrines proclaimed by Moses and confirmed by Paul. And [God] hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth.'

6

"These distinguished naturalists both arrived at the conclusion from these very monuments, that the negro race had only been developed, in the course of ages, within the African tropics, and were derived from Egypt."

3. The possibility of the development of the existing races of men from a common origin, within the period since the time of Noah, is strongly confirmed by the analogous changes which have taken place in the various species of domestic animals the horse, the ox, the swine, the sheep, the dog; also fowls, geese, ducks, etc. For an able exhibition of this argument, and of the facts which substantiate it, see Appendix, K.

III. The theory of the plural origin of the human species, in different .localities and at different times, is contrary to the analogy afforded by all other departments of the animal kingdom. It is a law of universal creation, so far as known, that every

* A true charge. See Types of Mankind.

species of animals had a single origin. Says Professor Dana,

66

Among the higher mammals no species is known to have existed originally within the tropics or temperate zones on both the oriental and occidental continents. And more than this, species have a limited range on that particular continent to which they are confined.

"The same species among monkeys — the tribe at the head of the brute mammals-in no instance occurs on both, nor even the same genus, nor even the same family, for the American type is that of the inferior Platyrrhines, while the African is that of the Catarrhines, which most approach man in their features and structure. This is only the highest of an extensive range of facts in zoology, sustaining the principle in view. If, therefore, man is of one species, he should be restricted also to one continent in his origin.

"Moreover, man's capability of spreading to all lands, and of adaptation to all climates, renders creation in different localities over the globe eminently unnecessary, and directly opposed to his own good. It would be doing for man what man could do of himself. It would be contracting the field of conquest before him in nature, thereby lessening his means and opportunities of development." *

Says Dr. Bachman,

*Geology, p. 585.