much to man as to the lower mammals, seeing that it is perfectly
demonstrable that the structural differences which separate man from
the apes are not greater than those which separate some apes from
others. There cannot be the slightest doubt in the world that the
argument which applies to the improvement of the horse from an earlier
stock, or of ape from ape, applies to the improvement of man from some
simpler and lower stock than man. There is not a single
faculty--functional or structural, moral, intellectual, or
instinctive,--there is no faculty whatever that is not capable of
improvement; there is no faculty whatsoever which does not depend upon
structure, and as structure tends to vary, it is capable of being
improved.

Well, I have taken a good deal of pains at various times to prove this,
and I have endeavoured to meet the objections of those who maintain,
that the structural differences between man and the lower animals are
of so vast a character and enormous extent, that even if Mr. Darwin's
views are correct, you cannot imagine this particular modification to
take place. It is, in fact, easy matter to prove that, so far as
structure is concerned, man differs to no greater extent from the
animals which are immediately below him than these do from other members
of the same order. Upon the other hand, there is no one who estimates
more highly than I do the dignity of human nature, and the width of the
gulf in intellectual and moral matters, which lies between man and the
whole of the lower creation.

But I find this very argument brought forward vehemently by some. "You
say that man has proceeded from a modification of some lower animal,
and you take pains to prove that the structural differences which are
said to exist in his brain do not exist at all, and you teach that all