V .F. THE n : V ?4^* Zc^fe ft*' : : / r -A*' • -s /Xir y:^; ON THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. BY ST. GEOEGE MIYART, F. E. S. NEW YOEK : D. APPLETON AND COMPANY, 549 & 651 BROADWAY. 1871. TO SIE HENKY HOLLAND, BABT., M. D., F. R. S., D. C. L., ETC., ETC. MY DEAE SIK HEXRY: In giving myself the pleasure to dedicate, as I now do, this work to you, it is not my intention to identify you with any views of my own advocated in it. I simply avail myself of an opportunity of paying a tribute of esteem and regard to my earliest scientific friend — the first to encourage me in pursuing the study of Nature. I remain, My dear Sir Henry, Ever faithfully yours, ST. GEOEGE MIYAET. 7 XORTH BANK, REGENT'S PARK, December 8, 1870. A CONTENTS. CHAPTER L INTBODUCTOBT. The Problem of the Genesis of Species stated.— Nature of its Probable Solution.— Im- portance of the Question.— Position here defended.— Statement of the DAKWTN-IAX THEOBY.— Its Applicability to Details of Geographical Distribution ; to Rudimentary Structures; to Homology; to Mimicry, etc.— Consequent Utility of the Theory.— Its "Wide Acceptance.— Reasons for this, other than, and in Addition to, its Scientific Value.— Its Simplicity.— Its Bearing on Religious Questions.— Odium Theologicum and Odium Antith^ologicum. — The Antagonism supposed by many to exist be- tween it and Theology neither necessary nor universal — Christian Authorities in iavor of Evolution.— Mr. Darwin's "Animals and Plants under Domestication." — Difficulties of the Darwinian Theory enumerated . . . . p. 13 CHAPTER II. THE INCOilPETENCY OF "NATURAL SELECTION " TO ACCOUNT FOB THE IN- CIPIENT STAGES OF USEFUL STEUCTUBES. Mr. Darwin supposes that Natural Selection acts by Slight Variations.— These must be useful at once.— Difficulties as to the Girafie ; as to Mimicry ; as to the Heads of Flat-fishes ; as to the Origin and Constancy of the Vertebrate limbs ; as to Whale- bone ; as to the Young Kangaroo ; as to Sea-urchins ; ag to Certain Processes of Metamorphosis ; as to the Mammary-gland ; as to Certain Ape Characters ; as to CONTENTS. the Eattlesnake and Cobra ; as to the Process of Formation of the Eye and Ear, as to the Fully-developed Condition of the Eye and Ear; as to the Voice; as to Shell- fish; as to Orchids; as to Ants.— the Necessity for the Simultaneous Modification of Many Individuals.— Summary and Conclusion . . . . p. 35 CHAPTEE III. THE COEXISTENCE OF CLOSELY-SIMILAR STRUCTURES OF DIVERSE ORIGIN. Chances against Concordant Variations.— Examples of Discordant Ones.— Concordant Variations not unlikely on a non-Darwinian Evolutionary Hypothesis.— Placental and Implacental Mammals.— Birds and Eeptiles.— Independent Origins of Similar Sense Organs.— The Ear.— The Eye.— Other Coincidences.— Causes besides Natural Selection produce Concordant Variations in Certain Geographical Eegions.— Causes besides Natural Selection produce Concordant Variations in Certain Zoological and Botanical Groups.— There are Homologous Parts not genetically related.— Harmony in respect of the Organic and Inorganic Worlds.— Summary and Conclusion . p. 76 CHAPTEE IV. MINUTE AND GRADUAL MODIFICATIONS. There are Difficulties as to Minute Modifications, even if not fortuitous.— Examples of Sudden and Considerable Modifications of Different Kinds.— Prof. Owen's View.— Mr. "Wallace. — Prof. Huxley. — Objections to Sudden Changes. — Labyrinthodont. — Potto.— Cetacea.— As to Origin of Bird's "Wing.— Tendrils of Climbing Plants. — Animals once supposed to be Connecting Links. — Early Specialization of Structure. — Macrauchenia.— Glyptodon.— Sabre-toothed Tiger.— Conclusion . . p. Ill CHAPTEE V. AS TO SPECIFIC STABILITY. What is meant by the Phrase " Specific Stability ; " such Stability to be expected a priori, or else Considerable Changes at once.— Eapidly-increasing DiflSculty of in- tensifying Eace Characters ; Alleged Causes of this Phenomenon ; probably an In- CONTEXTS. 7 ternal Cause coSperates. — A Certain Definiteness in Variations. — Mr. Darwin ad- mits the Principle of Specific Stability in Certain Cases of Unequal Variability.— The Goose.— The Peacock.— The Guinea-fowL— Exceptional Causes of Variation under Domestication. — Alleged Tendency to Reversion. — Instances. — Sterility of Hybrids.— Prepotency of Pollen of Same Species, but of Different Eace.— Mortality in Young Gallinaceous Hybrids. — A Bar to Intermixture exists somewhere. — Guinea-pigs. — Summary and Conclusion . . . . .p. 127 CHAPTER VI. SPECIES A2TD TIME. IVo Relations of Species to Time.— No Evidence of Past Existence of Minutely- intermediate Forms when such might be expected a priori. — Bats, Pterodac- tyls, Dinosauria, and Birds. — Ichthyosauria, Chelonia, and Anoura. — Horse An- cestry.—Labyrinthodonts and Trilobites.— Two Subdivisions of the Second Rela- tion of Species to Time.— Sir William Thomson's Views.— Probable Period re- quired for Ultimate Specific Evolution from Primitive Ancestral Forms.— Geo- metrical Increase of Time required for Rapidly-multiplying Increase of Structural Differences. — Proboscis Monkey. — Time required for Deposition of Strata neces- sary for Darwinian Evolution. — High Organization of Silurian Forms of Life. — Absence of Fossils in Oldest Rocks.— Summary and Conclusion . . p. 142 CHAPTEE VH. SPECIES AXD SPACB. The Geographical Distribution of Animals presents Difiiculties.— These not insur- mountable in themselves ; harmonize with other Difficulties.— Fresh- water Fishes. —Forms common to Africa and India; to Africa and South America; to China and Australia; to North America and China; to New Zealand and South America; to South America and Tasmania; to South America and Australia. — Pleurodont Lizards. — Insectivorous Mammals. — Similarity of European and South American Frogs. — Analogy between European Salmon and Fishes of New Zea- land, etc. — An Ancient Antarctic Continent probable. — Other Modes of accounting for Facts of Distribution. — Independent Origin of Closely-similar Forms. — Con- clusion ..... ... p. 158 8 CONTENTS. CHAPTER VIII. HOMOLOGIES. Animals' made up of Parts mutually related in Various "Ways. — What Homology ia • — Its Various Kinds. — Serial Homology. — Lateral Homology. — Vertical Homology. —Mr. Herbert Spencer's Explanations. — An Internal Power necessary, as shown by Facts of Comparative Anatomy.— Of Teratology.— M. St. Hilaire.— Prof. Burt Wild- er.—Foot-wings.— Facts of Pathology.— Mr. James Paget.— Dr. William Budd.— The Existence of such an Internal Power of Individual Development diminishes the Improbability of an Analogous Law of Specific Origination. . . p. 169 CHAPTER IX. EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. Th; Origin of Morals an Inquiry not foreign to the Subject of this Book.— Modern Utilitarian View as to that Origin.— Mr. Darwin's Speculation as to the Origin of the Abhorrence of Incest— Cause assigned by him insufficient.— Care of the Aged and Infirm opposed by "Natural Selection;" also Self-abnegation and Asceti- cism.—Distinctness of the Ideas "Eight" and " Useful."— Mr. John Stuart Mill.— Insufficiency of "Natural Selection" to account for the Origin of the Distinction between Duty and Profit.— Distinction of Moral Acts into "Material" and "For- mal."—No Ground for believing that Formal Morality exists in Brutes.— Evidence that it does exist in Savages.— Facility with which Savages may be misunder- stood.—Objections as to Diversity of Customs.— Mr. Hutton's Keview of Mr. Her- bert Spencer. — Anticipatory Character of Morals. — Sir John Lubbock's Explana- tion.— Summary and Conclusion . . . . . .p. 202 CHAPTER X. PANGENESIS. A Provisional Hypothesis supplementing "Natural Selection."— Statement of the Hy- pothesis.— Difficulty as to Multitude of Gemmules. — As to Certain Modes of Re- production.— As to Formations without the Eequisite Gemmules. — Mr. Lewes and Prof. Delpino. — Difficulty as to Developmental Force of Gemmules. — As to their Spontaneous Fission. — Pangenesis and Vitalism. — Paradoxical Eeality. — Pangene- sis scarcely superior to Anterior Hypothesis.— Button .—Owen.— Herbert Spen- cer.—" Gemmules v as Mysterious as " Physiological Units."— Conclusion . p. 223 CONTEXTS. 9 CHAPTER XI. SPECIFIC GENESIS. Review of the Statements and Arguments of Preceding Chapters.— Cumulative Argu- ment against Predominant Action of "Natural Selection."— Whether any Thing positive as well as negative can be enunciated. — Constancy of Laws of Nature does not necessarily urply Constancy of Specific Evolution. — Possible Exceptional Sta- bility of Existing Epoch. — Probability that an Internal Cause of Change exists. — Innate Powers somewhere must be accepted.— Symbolism of Molecular Action under Yibrating Impulses. — Prof. Owen's Statement-statement of the Author's View.— It avoids the Difficulties which oppose "Natural Selection."— It harmon- izes Apparently Conflicting Conceptions.— Summary and Conclusion . p. 235 CHAPTER XII. THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. Prejudiced Opinions on the Subject — " Creation " sometimes denied from Prejudice.— The Unknowable.— Mr. Herbert Spencer's Objections to Theism; to Creation.— Meanings of Term " Creation." — Confusion from not distinguishing between " Pri- mary" and " Derivative " Creation. — Mr. Darwin's Objections. — Bearing of Chris- tianity on the Theory of Evolution.— Supposed Opposition, the Kesult of a Miscon- ception.—Theological Authority not opposed to Evolution.— St Augustine.— St. Thomas Aquinas.— Certain Consequences of Want of Flexibility of Mind.— Reason and Imagination. — The First Cause and Demonstration. — Parallel between Chris- tianity and Natural Theology.— What Evolution of Species is.— Prof. Agassiz.— In- nate Powers must be recognized. — Bearing of Evolution on Religious Belief. — Prof. Huxley. — Prof. Owen. — Mr. Wallace. — Mr. Darwin. — A priori Conception of Di- vine Action.— Origin of Man.— Absolute Creation and Dogma.— Mr. Wallace's View. —A Supernatural Origin for Man's Body not necessary.— Two Orders of Being in Man.— Two Modes of Origin.— Harmony of the Physical, Hyperphysical, and Super- natural—Reconciliation of Science and Religion as regards Evolution.— Conclu- sion p. 259 INDEX p. 308 LIST OF ILLTJSTKATICmS. Leaf Butterfly in flight and repose (from Mr. A. Wallace's " Malay's Archi- pelago") 43 Walking-Leaf Insect 47 Pleuronectidie, with the peculiarly placed eye in different positions (from Dr. Traquair's paper in Linn. Soc. Trans*. 1865) .... 49, 180 Mouth of Whale (from Prof . Owen's" Odontography") ... 53 Four plates of Baleen seen obliquely from within (from Prof. Owen's " Odon- tography") ......... 54 Dugong . . . . . . . . . . 54, 189 Echinus or Sea Urchin . . • . . . . . 56, 181 Pedicellarise of Echinus vary much enlarged ..... 59 Rattlesnake ........*. 62 Cobra (from Sir Andrew SmitKs " Southern Africa") ... 63 Wingbones of Pterodactyl, Bat, and Bird (from Mr. Andrew Murray's " Geographical Distribution of Mammals") . . . .77,144,171 Skeleton of Flying-Dragon ..... . . 78, 172 Centipede (from a specimen in the Museum of the Royal College of Sur- geons) . . . . . . . . . .79, 173 Teeth of Urotrichus and Perameles ...... 82 The Archeopteryx (from Prof. Owen's '•'Anatomy of Vertebratar>) . . 86, 146 Cuttie-Fish 88, 155 Skeleton of Ichthyosaurus 92,121,146,191 Cytberidea Torosa (from Messrs. Brady and Robertson's paper in Ann. and Mag. of Nat. Hist., 1870) 93 A Polyzoon, with Bird's-head processes ...... 94 Bird's-head processes greatly enlarged ...... 95 Antechinus Minutissimus and Mus Delicatulus (from Mr. Andrew Murray's " Geographical Distribution of Mammals ") .... 96 12 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. Outlines of Wings of Butterflies of Celebes compared with those of allied spe- cies elsewhere ......... 100 Great Shielded Grasshopper 103 The Six-shafted Bird of Paradise 104 The Long-tailed Bird of Paradise . . . . . . 105 The Eed Bird of Paradise 106 Horned Flies 10T The Magnificent Bird of Paradise 10T (The above seven figures are from Mr. A. Wallace's " Malay Archi- pelago.") *Much enlarged horizontal Section of the Tooth of a Labyrinthodon (from Prof. Owen's " Odontography ") . . . . . .118 Hand of the Potto (from life) 119 Skeleton of Plesiosaurus 120,147,192 The Aye-Aye (from Trans. ofZool. Soc) ..... 122 Dentition of Sabre-toothed Tiger (from Prof. Owen's " Odontography ") . 125 Trilobite 149,185 Inner side of Lower Jaw of Pleurodont Lizard (from Prof. Owen's " Odontog- raphy") 162 Solenodon (from Berlin Trans.) . . . . . . .163 Tarsal Bones of Galago and Cheirogaleus (from Proc. Zool. Soc.) . . 173 Squilla 174 Parts of the Skeleton of the Lobster 175 Spine of Galago Allenii (from Proc. Zool. Soc) ..... 176 Vertebrae of Axoloil (from Proc. ZooL Soc.) 179 Annelid undergoing spontaneous fission . . . . . 183, 226 Aard-Yark (Orycteropus capensis) . . . • . ' . 188 Pangolin (Manis) ......... 189 Skeleton of Manus and Pes of a Tailed Batrachian (from Prof. Gegenbaur's " Tarsus and Carpus v) ....... 192 Flexor Muscles of Hand of Nycticetus (from Proc. Zool. Soc.) . . .194 The Fibres of Corti 296 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. The Problem of the Genesis of Species stated.— Nature of its Probable Solution.— Im- portance of the Question.— Position here defended.— Statement of the DARWINIAX THEORY.— Its Applicability to Details of Geographical Distribution ; to Rudimentary Structures ; to Homology ; to Mimicry, etc. — Consequent Utility of the Theory. — Its Wide Acceptance.— Eeasons for this, other than, and in Addition to, its Scientific Value.— Its Simplicity.— Its Bearing on Religious Questions.— Odium Theologicum and Odium AntitJwologicum. — The Antagonism supposed by many to exist be- tween it and Theology neither necessary nor universal.— Christian Authorities in favor of Evolution. — Mr. Darwin's "Animals and Plants under Domestication.''' — Difficulties of the Darwinian Theory enumerated. THE great problem which has so long exercised the minds of naturalists, namely, that concerning the origin of different kinds of animals and plants, seems at last to be fairly on the road to receive — perhaps at no very dis- tant future — as satisfactory a solution as it can well have. But the problem presents peculiar difficulties. The birth of a " species " has often been compared with that of an " individual." The origin, however, of even an individ- ual animal or plant (that which determines an embryo to evolve itself — as, e. g., a spider rather than a beetle, a rose- plant rather than a pear) is shrouded in obscurity. A fortiori must this be the case with the origin of a " species." Moreover, the analogy between a "species" and an 14 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. " individual " is a very incomplete one. The word " indi- vidual " denotes a concrete whole with a real, separate, and distinct existence. The word " species," on the other hand, denotes a peculiar congeries of characters, innate powers and qualities, and a certain nature realized indeed in indi- viduals, but having no separate existence, except ideally as a thought in some mind. Thus the birth of a " species " can only be compared metaphorically, and very imperfectly, with that of an " indi- vidual." Individuals, as individuals, actually and directly produce and bring forth other individuals ; but no " congeries of characters," no "common nature" as such, can directly bring forth another " common nature," because, per se, it has no existence (other than ideal) apart from the individ- uals in which it is manifested. The problem then is, " By what combination of natural laws does a new c common nature ' appear upon the scene of realized existence ? " i. e., how is an individual embody- ing such new characters produced ? For the approximation we have of late made toward the solution of this problem, we are mainly indebted to the in- valuable labors and active brains of Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace. Nevertheless, important as have been the impulse and direction given by those writers to both our observations and speculations, the solution will not (if the views here advocated are correct) ultimately present that aspect and character with which it has issued from the hands of those writers. Neither, most certainly, will that solution agree in ap- pearance or substance with the more or less crude concep- tions which have been put forth by most of the opponents of Messrs. Darwin and Wallace. Rather, judging from the more recent manifestations of I.] INTRODUCTORY. 15 thought on opposite sides, \ve may expect the development of some tertium quid — the resultant of forces coming from different quarters, and not coinciding in direction with any one of them. As error is almost always partial truth, and so consists in the exaggeration or distortion of one verity by the sup- pression of another which qualifies and modifies the former, we may hope, by the synthesis of the truths contended for by various advocates, to arrive at the one conciliating reality. Signs of this conciliation are not wanting: opposite scientific views, opposite philosophical conceptions, and opposite religious beliefs, are rapidly tending, by their vig- orous conflict,, to evolve such a systematic and comprehen- sive view of the genesis of species as will completely harmonize with the teachings of science, philosophy, and religion. To endeavor to add one stone to this temple of concord, to try and remove a few of the misconceptions and mutual misunderstandings which oppose harmonious action, are the aim and endeavor of the present work. This aim it is hoped to attain, not by shirking difficulties^ but analyzing them, and by endeavoring to dig down to the common root which supports and unites diverging stems of truth. It cannot but be a gain when the laborers in the three fields above mentioned, namely, science, philosophy, and religion, shall fully recognize this harmony. Then the energy too often spent in futile controversy, or withheld through prejudice, may be profitably and reciprocally exer- cised for the mutual benefit of all. Remarkable is the rapidity with which an interest in the question of specific origination has spread. But a few years ago it scarcely occupied the minds of any but natural- ists. Then the crude theory put forth by Lamarck, and by his English interpreter, the author of the " Vestiges of Cre- 16 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. ation," had rather discredited than helped on a belief in organic evolution — a belief, that is, in new kinds being pro- duced from older ones by the ordinary and constant opera- tion of natural laws. Now, however, this belief is widely diffused. Indeed, there are few drawing-rooms where it is not the subject of occasional discussion, and artisans and school-boys have their views as to the permanence of or- ganic forms. Moreover, the reception of this doctrine tends actually, though by no means necessarily, to be accompa- nied by certain beliefs with regard to quite distinct and very momentous subject-matter. So that the question of the " Genesis of Species " is not only one of great interest, but also of much importance. But though the calm and thorough consideration of this matter is at the present moment exceedingly desirable, yet the actual importance of the question itself as to its conse- quences in the domain of theology has been strangely exag- gerated by many, both of its opponents and supporters. This is especially the case with that form of the evolution theory which is associated with the name of Mr. Darwin ; and yet neither the refutation nor the demonstration of that doctrine would be necessarily accompanied by the results which are hoped for by one party and dreaded by another. The general theory of evolution has indeed for some time past steadily gained ground, and it may be safely pre- dicted that the number of facts which can be brought for- ward in its support will, in a few years, be vastly augment- ed. But the prevalence of this theory need alarm no one, for it is, without any doubt, perfectly consistent with strict- est and most orthodox Christian theology. Moreover, it is not altogether without obscurities, and cannot yet be con- sidered as fully demonstrated. The special Darwinian hypothesis, however, is beset with certain scientific difficulties, which must by no means I.] INTRODUCTORY. 17 be ignored, and some of which, I venture to think, are ab- solutely insuperable. What Darwinism or " Natural Selec- tion " is, will be shortly explained ; but, before doing so, I think it well to state the object of this book, and the view taken up and defended in it. It is its object to maintain the position that " Natural Selection " acts, and indeed must act, but +hat still, in order that we may be able to account for the production of known kinds of animals and plants, it requires to be supplemented by the action of some other natural law or laws as yet undiscovered.1 Also, that the consequences which have been drawn from Evolution, whether exclusively Darwinian or not, to the prejudice of religion, by no means follow from it, and are in fact illegiti- mate. The Darwinian theory of " Natural Selection " may be shortly stated thus : 2 Every kind of animal and plant tends to increase in numbers in a geometrical progression. Every kind of animal and plant transmits a general like- ness, with individual differences, to its offspring. Every individual may present minute variations of any kind and in any direction. Past time has been practically infinite. Every individual has to endure a very severe struggle for existence, owing to the tendency to geometrical increase of all kinds of animals and plants, while the total animal and vegetable population (man and his agency excepted) remains almost stationary. 1 In the last edition of the "Origin of Species" (1869) Mr. Darwin himself admits that "Natural Selection" has not been the exclusive means of modification, though he still contends it has been the most im- portant one. 8 See Mr. Wallace's recent work, entitled " Contributions to the The- ory of Natural Selection," where, at p. 302, it is very well and shortly stated. 18 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Thus, every variation of a kind tending to save the life of the individual possessing it, or to enable it more surely to propagate its kind, will in the long-run be preserved, and will transmit its favorable peculiarity to some of its offspring, which peculiarity will thus become intensified till it reaches the maximum degree of utility. On the other hand, individuals presenting unfavorable peculiarities will be ruthlessly destroyed. The action of this law of " Natural Selection " may thus be well represented by the convenient expression, " survival of the fittest." 3 Now, this conception of Mr. Darwin's is, perhaps, the most interesting theory, in relation to natural science, w^hich has been promulgated during the present century. Remarkable, indeed, is the way in which it groups together such a vast and varied series of biological 4 facts, and even paradoxes, which it appears more or less clearly to explain, as the following instances will show. By this theory of "Natural Selection," light is thrown on the more singular facts relating to the geographical distribution of animals and plants ; for example, on the resemblance between the past and present inhabitants of different parts of the earth's surface. Thus in Australia remains have been found of creatures closely allied to kangaroos and other kinds of pouched beasts, which in the present day exist nowhere but in the Australian region. Similarly in South America, and nowhere else, are found sloths and armadillos, and in that same part of the world have been discovered bones of ani- mals different indeed from existing sloths and armadillos, but yet much more nearly related to them than to any other kinds whatever. Such coincidences between the existing and antecedent geographical distribution of forms are nu- 3 " Natural Selection " is happily so termed by Mr. Herbert Spencer in his " Principles of Biology." 4 Biology is the science of life. It contains zoology, or the science of animals, and botany, or that of plants. I.] INTRODUCTORY. 19 merous. Again, "Natural Selection" serves to explain the circumstance that often in adjacent islands we find ani- mals closely resembling, and appearing to represent, each other ; while, if certain of these islands show signs (by depth of surrounding sea or what not) of more ancient separation, the animals inhabiting them exhibit a corre- sponding divergence.5 The explanation consists in rep- resenting the forms inhabiting the islands as being the modified descendants of a common stock, the modification being greatest where the separation has been the most pro- longed. " Rudimentary structures " also receive an explanation by means of this theory. These structures are parts which are apparently functionless and useless where they occur, but which represent similar parts of large size and func- tional importance in other animals. Examples of such " ru- dimentary structures" are the foetal teeth of whales, and of the front part of the jaw of ruminating quadrupeds. These foetal structures are minute in size, and never cut the gum, but are reabsorbed without ever coming into use, while no other teeth succeed them or represent them in the adult condition of those animals. The mammary glands of all male beasts constitute another example, as also does the wing of the apteryx — a New Zealand bird utterly incapable of flight, and with the wing in a quite rudimentary condi- tion (whence the name of the animal). Yet this rudiment- ary wing contains bones which are miniature representa- tives of the ordinary wing-bones of birds of flight. Now, the presence of these useless bones and teeth is explained if they may be considered as actually being the inherited diminished representatives of parts of large size and func- tional importance in the remote ancestors of these various animals. 5 For very interesting examples, see Mr. "Wallace's " Malay Archi- pelago." 20 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP Again, the singular facts of " homology " are capable of a similar explanation. " Homology " is the name applied to the investigation of those profound resemblances which have so often been found to underlie superficial differences between animals of very different form and habit. Thus man, the horse, the whale, and the bat, all have the pec- toral limb, whether it be the arm, or fore-leg, or paddle, or wing, formed on essentially the same type, though the num- ber and proportion of parts may more or less differ. Again, the butterfly and the shrimp, different as they are in ap- pearance and mode of life, are yet constructed on the same common plan, of which they constitute diverging manifesta- tions. No a priori reason is conceivable why such simi- larities should be necessary, but they are readily explicable on the assumption of a genetic relationship and affinity be- tween the animals in question, assuming, that is, that they are the modified descendants of some ancient form — their common ancestor. That remarkable series of changes which animals under- go before they attain their adult condition, which is called their process of development, and during which they more or less closely resemble other animals during the early stages of the same process, has also great light thrown on it from the same source. The question as to the singularly complex resemblances borne by every adult animal and plant to a certain number of other animals and plants — re- semblances by means of which the adopted zoological and botanical systems of classification have been possible — finds its solution in a similar manner, classification becoming the expression of a genealogical relationship. Finally, by this theory — and as yet by this alone — can any explanation be given of that extraordinary phenomenon which is meta- phorically termed mimicry. Mimicry is a close and striking, yet superficial resemblance borne by some animal or plant to some other, perhaps very different, animal or plant. The I.] INTRODUCTORY. 21 "walking leaf" (an insect belonging to the grasshopper and cricket order) is a well-known and conspicuous instance of the assumption by an animal of the appearance of a vegetable structure (see illustration on p. 47) ; and the bee. fly, and spider orchids, are familiar examples of a converse resemblance. Birds, butterflies, reptiles, and even fish, seem to bear in certain instances a similarly striking re- semblance to other birds, butterflies, reptiles, and fish, of altogether distinct kinds. The explanation of this matter which " Natural Selection " offers, as to animals, is that cer- tain varieties of one kind have found exemption from per- secution in consequence of an accidental resemblance which such varieties have exhibited to animals of another kind, or to plants ; and that they were thus preserved, and the de- gree of resemblance was continually augmented in their descendants. As to plants, the explanation offered by this theory might, perhaps, be, that varieties of plants, which presented a certain superficial resemblance in their flowers to insects, have thereby been helped to propagate their kind, the visit of certain insects being useful or indispen- sable to the fertilization of many flowers. We have thus a whole series of important facts which " Natural Selection " helps us to understand and coordi- nate. And not only are all these diverse facts strung to- gether, as it were, by the theory in question ; not only does it explain the development of the complex instincts of the beaver, the cuckoo, the bee, and the ant, as also the dazzling brilliancy of the humming-bird, the glowing tail and neck of the peacock, and the melody of the nightin- gale ; the perfume of the rose and the violet, the bril- liancy of the tulip and the sweetness of the nectar of flow- ers ; not only does it help us to understand all these, but serves as a basis of future research and of inference from the known to the unknown, and it guides the investigator to the discovery of new facts which, when ascertained, it 22 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. seems also able to coordinate.6 Nay, " Natural Selection " seems capable of application not only to the building up of the smallest and most insignificant organisms, but even of extension beyond the biological domain altogether, so as possibly to have relation to the stable equilibrium of the solar system itself, and even of the whole sidereal uni- verse. Thus, whether this theory be true or false, all lov- ers of natural science should acknowledge a deep debt of gratitude to Messrs. Darwin and Wallace, on account of its practical utility. But the utility of a theory by no means implies its truth. What do we not owe, for example, to the labors of the Alchemists ? The emission theory of light, again, has been pregnant with valuable results, as still is the Atomic theory, and others which will readily suggest themselves. With regard to Mr. Darwin (with whose name, on ac- count of the noble self-abnegation of Mr. Wallace, the theory is in general exclusively associated), his friends may heartily congratulate him on the fact that he is one of the few exceptions to the rule respecting the non-appreciation of a prophet in his own country. It would be difficult to name another living laborer in the field of physical science who has excited an interest so wide-spread, and given rise to so much praise, gathering round him, as he has done, a chorus of more or less completely acquiescing disciples, themselves masters in science, and each the representative of a crowd of enthusiastic followers. Such is the Darwinian theory of " Natural Selection," such are the more remarkable facts which it is potent to *» 6 See Miiller's work, " Fur Darwin," lately translated into English by Mr. Dallas. Mr. Wallace also predicts the discovery, in Madagascar, of a hawk-moth with an enormously-long proboscis, and he does this on account of the discovery there of an orchid with a nectary from ten to fourteen inches in length. See Quarterly Journal of Science, October, 1867, and "Natural Selection," p. 275. I.] INTRODUCTORY. 23 explain, and such is the reception it has met with in the world. A few words now as to the reasons for the very wide-spread interest it has awakened, and the keenness with which the theory has been both advocated and com- bated. The important bearing it has on such an extensive range of scientific facts, its utility, and the vast knowledge and great ingenuity of its promulgator, are enough to ac- count for the heartiness of its reception by those learned in natural history. But quite other causes have concurred to produce the general and higher degree of interest felt in the theory besides the readiness with which it harmonizes with -biological facts. These latter could only be appreci- ated by physiologists, zoologists, and botanists ; whereas the Darwinian theory, so novel and so startling, has found a cloud of advocates and opponents beyond and outside the world of physical science. In the first place, it was inevitable that a great crowd of half-educated men and shallow thinkers should accept with eagerness the theory of " Natural Selection," or rath- er what they think to be such (for few things are more re- markable than the way in which it has been misunder- stood), on account of a certain characteristic it has in com- mon with other theories ; which should not be mentioned in the same breath with it, except, as now, with the accom- paniment of protest and apology. We refer to its remark- able simplicity, and the ready way in which phenomena the most complex appear explicable by a cause for the comprehension of which laborious and persevering efforts are not required, but which maybe represented by the sim- ple phrase " survival of the fittest." With nothing more than this, can, on the Darwinian theory, all the most intri- cate facts of distribution and affinity, form and color, be accounted for ; as well the most complex instincts and the most admirable adjustments, such as those of the human 24 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP eye and ear. It is in great measure, then, owing to this supposed simplicity, and to a belief in its being yet easier and more simple than it is, that Darwinism, however imper- fectly understood, has become a subject for general conver- sation, and has been able thus widely to increase a certain knowledge of biological matters; and this excitation of interest, in quarters where otherwise it would have been en- tirely wanting, is an additional motive for gratitude on the part of naturalists to the authors of the new theory. At the same time it must be admitted that a similar " simpli- city"— the apparently easy explanation of complex phe- nomena— also constitutes the charm of such matters as hy- dropathy and phrenology, in the eyes of the unlearned or half-educated public. It is indeed the charm of all those seeming " short-cuts " to knowledge, by which the labor of mastering scientific details is spared to those who yet be- lieve that without such labor they can attain all the most valuable results of scientific research. It is not, of course, for a moment meant to imply that its " simplicity " tells at all against "Natural Selection," but only that the actual or supposed possession of that quality is a strong reason for the wide and somewhat hasty acceptance of the theory, whether it be true or not. In the second place, it was inevitable that a theory ap- pearing to have very grave relations with questions of the last importance and interest to man, that is, with ques- tions of religious belief, should call up an army of assail- ants and defenders. Nor have the supporters of the theory much reason, in many cases, to blame the more or less unskilful and hasty attacks of adversaries, seeing that those attacks have been in great part due to the unskilful and perverse advocacy of the cause on the part of some of its adherents. If the odium theologieum has inspired some of its opponents, it is undeniable that the odium an- titheologicum has possessed not a few of its supporters. I.] INTRODUCTORY. 25 It is true (and in appreciating some of Mr. Darwin's ex- pressions it should never be forgotten) that the theory has been both at its first promulgation and since vehemently attacked and denounced as unchristian, nay, as necessarily atheistic ; but it is not less true that it has been made use of as a weapon of offence by irreligious writers, and has been again and again, especially in Continental Europe, thrown, as it were, in the face of believers, with sneers and contumely. When we recollect the warmth with which what he thought was Darwinism was advocated by such a writer as Prof. Vogt, one cause of his zeal was not far to seek — a zeal, by-the-way, certainly not " accord- ing to knowledge ; " for few conceptions could have been more conflicting with true Darwinism than the theory he formerly maintained, but has since abandoned, viz., that the men of the Old World were descended from African and Asiatic apes, while, similarly, the American apes were the progenitors of the human beings of tfce New World. The cause of this palpable error in a too eager disciple one might hope was not anxiety to snatch up all or any arms available against Christianity, were it not for the tone un- happily adopted by this author. But it is unfortunately quite impossible to mistake his meaning and intention, for he is a writer whose offensiveness is gross, while it is some- times almost surpassed by an amazing shallowness. Of course, as might fully be expected, he adopts and repro- duces the absurdly trivial objections to absolute morality drawn from differences in national customs.7 And he seems to have as little conception of the distinction be- tween " formally " moral actions and those which are only " materially " moral, as of that between the verbum men- tale and the verbum oris. As an example of his onesided- ness, it may be remarked that he compares the skulls of the 1 " Lectures on Man," translated by the Anthropological Society, 1864, p. 229. 2 #6 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. American monkeys (Cebus apella and G. albifrons) with the intention of showing that man is of several distinct species, because skulls of different men are less alike than are those of these two monkeys ; and he does this regard- less of how the skulls of domestic animals (with which it is far more legitimate to compare races of men than with wild kinds), e. g., of different dogs or pigeons, tell precisely in the opposite direction. Regardless also of the fact that perhaps no genus of monkeys is in a more unsatisfactory state as to the determination of its different kinds than the genus chosen by him for illustration. This is so much the case that J. A. Wagner (in his supplement to Schreber's great work on Beasts) at first included all the kinds in a single species. As to the strength of his prejudice and his regrettable coarseness, one quotation will be enough to display both. Speaking of certain early Christian missionaries, he says : e " It is not so very improbable that the new religion, before which the flourishing Roman civilization relapsed into a state of barbarism, should have been introduced by people in whose skulls the anatomist finds simious characters so well devel- oped, and in which the phrenologist finds the organ of ven- eration so much enlarged. I shall, in the meanwhile, call these simious narrow skulls of Switzerland i Apostle skulls,' as I imagine that in life they must have resembled the type of Peter the Apostle, as represented in Byzantine-Nazarene art." In face of such a spirit, can it be wondered at that dis- putants have grown warm ? Moreover, in estimating the vehemence of the opposition which has been offered, it should be borne in mind that the views defended by religious writers are, or should be, all-important in their eyes. They could not be expected to view with equanimity the destruc- tion in many minds of " theology, natural and revealed, 8 " Lectures on Man," p. 378. L] INTRODUCTORY. 27 psychology, and metaphysics ; " nor to weign with calm and frigid impartiality arguments which seemed to them to be fraught with results of the highest moment to mankind, and therefore imposing on their consciences strenuous opposi- tion as a first duty. Cool, judicial impartiality in them would have been a sign perhaps of intellectual gifts, but also of a more imports nt deficiency of generous emotion. It is easy to complain of the onesidedness of many of those who oppose Darwinism in the interest of orthodoxy ; but not at all less patent is the intolerance and narrow- mindedness of some of those who advocate it, avowedly or covertly, in the interest of heterodoxy. This hastiness of rejection or acceptance, determined by ulterior consequences believed to attach to " Natural Selection," is unfortunately in part to be accounted for by some expressions and a cer- tain tone to be found in Mr. Darwin's writings. That his expressions, however, are not always to be construed liter- ally is manifest. His frequent use metaphorically of the expressions, "contrivance," for example, and "purpose," has elicited, from the Duke of Argjdl and others, criticisms which fail to tell against their opponent, because such ex- pressions are, in Mr. Darwin's writings merely figurative — metaphors, and nothing more. It may be hoped, then, that a similar looseness of ex- pression will account for passages of a directly opposite tendency to that of his theistic metaphors. Moreover, it must not be forgotten that he frequently uses that absolutely theological term, " the Creator," and that he has retained in all the editions of his " Origin of Species" an expression which has been much criticised. He speaks " of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms, or into one."9 This is merely mentioned in justice to Mr. Darwin, and by no means because it is a position which this • See 5th edit., 1869, p. 579. 38 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. book is intended to support. For, from Mr. Darwin's usual mode of speaking, it appears that by such divine action he means a supernatural intervention, whereas it is here con- tended that throughout the whole process of physical evo- lution— -the first manifestation of life included — supernatu- ral action is assuredly not to be looked for. Again, in justice to Mr. Darwin, it may be observed that he is addressing the general public, and opposing the ordinary and common objections of popular religionists, who have inveighed against " Evolution " and " Natural Selec- tion " as atheistic, impious, and directly conflicting with the dogma of creation. Still, in so important a matter, it is to be regretted that he did not take the trouble to distinguish between such merely popular views and those which repose upon some more venerable authority. Mr. John Stuart Mill has replied to similar critics, and shown that the assertion that his philosophy is irreconcilable with theism is unfounded ; and it would have been better if Mr. Darwin had dealt in the same manner with some of his assailants, and shown the futility of certain of their objections when viewed from a more elevated religious stand-point. Instead of so doing, he seems to adopt the narrowest notions of his opponents, and, far from endeavoring to expand them, appears to wish to indorse them, and to lend to them the weight of his author- ity. It is thus that Mr. Darwin seems to admit and assume that the idea of " creation " necessitates a belief in an in- terference with, or dispensation of, natural laws, and that " creation " must be accompanied by arbitrary and unorderly phenomena. None but the crudest conceptions are placed by him to the credit of supporters of the dogma of creation, and it is constantly asserted that they, to be consistent, must offer " creative fiat* " as explanations of physical phe- nomena, and be guilty of numerous other such absurdities. It is impossible, therefore, to acquit Mr. Darwin of at least L] INTRODUCTORY. 29 a certain carelessness in this matter ; and the result is, he has the appearance of opposing ideas which he gives no clear evidence of having ever fully appreciated. He is far from being alone in this, and perhaps merely takes up and reiterates, without much consideration, assertions previously assumed by others. Nothing could be further from Mr. Darwin's mind than any, however small, intentional misrep- resentation ; and it is therefore the more unfortunate that he should not have shown any appreciation of a position op- posed to his own other than that gross and crude one which he combats so superfluously — that he should appear, for a moment, to be one of those, of whom there are far too many, who first misrepresent their adversary's view and then elab- orately refute it ; who, in fact, erect a doll utterly incapable of self-defence, and then, with a flourish of trumpets and many vigorous strokes, overthrow the helpless dummy they had previously raised. This is what many do who more or less distinctly oppose theism in the interests, as they believe, of physical science ; and they often represent, among other things, a gross and narrow anthropomorphism as the necessary consequence of views opposed to those which they themselves advocate. Mr. Darwin and others may perhaps be excused if they have not devoted much time to the study of Christian phi- losophy ; but they have no right to assume or accept with- out careful examination, as an unquestioned fact, that in that philosophy there is a necessary antagonism between the two ideas, " creation " and " evolution," as applied to organic forms. It is notorious and patent to all who choose to seek, that many distinguished Christian thinkers have accepted and do accept both ideas, i. e., both " creation " and " evo- lution." As much as ten years ago, an eminently Christian writer observed : " The creationist theory does not necessitate the 30 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. perpetual search after manifestations of miraculous powers and perpetual ' catastrophes.' Creation is not a miraculous interference with the laws of Nature, but the very institu- tion of those laws. Law and regularity, not arbitrary in- tervention, was the patristic ideal of creation. With this notion, they admitted without difficulty the most surprising origin of living creatures, provided it took place by laic. They held that when God said, ' Let the waters produce,' ' Let the earth produce,' He conferred forces on the ele- ments of earth and water, which enabled them naturally to produce the various species of organic beings. This power, they thought, remains attached to the elements throughout all time." ] The same writer quotes St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, to the effect that, " in the institution of Nature we do not look for miracles, but for the laws of Na- ture." n And, again, St. Basil,12 speaks of the continued operation of natural laws in the production of all organ- isms. So much for writers of early and mediaeval times. As to the present day, the author can confidently affirm that there are many as well versed in theology as Mr. Darwin is in his own department of natural knowledge, who would not be disturbed by the thorough demonstration of his theory. Nay, they would not even be in the least painful- ly affected at witnessing the generation of animals of com- plex organization by the skilful artificial arrangement of natural forces, and the production, in the future, of a fish, by means analogous to those by which we now produce urea. And this because they know that the possibility of such phenomena, though by no means actually foreseen, has yet 10 TJie Rambler, March, 1860, vol. xii., p. 372. 11 " In prima institutione naturae non quaeritur miraculum, sed quid natura rerum habeat, ut Augustinus dicit, lib. ii., 'Sup. Gen. and lit. c. 1." (St. Thomas, Sum. I«. Ixvii. 4, ad 3.) 18 "Hexaem." Horn, ix., p". 81. I.] INTRODUCTORY. 31 been fully provided for in the old philosophy centuries be- fore Darwin, or even before Bacon, and that their place in the system can be at once assigned them without even dis- turbing its order or marring its harmony. Moreover, the old tradition in this respect has never been abandoned, however much it may have been ignored or neglected by some modern writers. In proof of this it may be observed that perhaps no post-mediaeval theologian has a wider reception among Christians throughout the world than Suarez, who has a separate section " in opposi- tion to those who maintain the distinct creation of the vari- ous kinds — or substantial forms — of organic life. But the consideration of this matter must be deferred for the present, and the question of evolution, whether Dar- winian or other, be first gone into. It is proposed, after that has been done, to return to this subject (here merely alluded to), and to consider at some length the bearing of " Evolution," whether Darwinian or non-Darwinian, upon " Creation and Theism." Now we will revert simply to the consideration of the theory of " Natural Selection " itself. Whatever may have hitherto been the amount of ac- ceptance that this theory has met with, all, I think, anti- cipated that the appearance of Mr. Darwin's large and care- ful work on " Animals and Plants under Domestication " could but further increase that acceptance. It is, however, somewhat problematical how far such anticipations will be realized. The newer book seems to add after all but little in, support of the theory, and to leave most, if not all, its difficulties exactly where they were. It is a question, also, whether the hypothesis of " Pangenesis " 14 may not be 13 Suarez, Metaphysica. Edition Yives. Paris, 1868. Vol. I. Dis- putatio xv., § 2. 14 " Pangenesis " is the name of the new theory proposed by Mr. Darwin, in order to account for various obscure physiological facts, such, 32 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP- found rather to encumber than to support the theory it was intended to subserve. However, the work in question treats only of domestic animals, and probably the next in- stalment will address itself more vigorously and directly to the difficulties which seem to us yet to bar the way to a complete acceptance of the doctrine. If the theory of Natural Selection can be shown to be quite insufficient to explain any considerable number of im- portant phenomena connected with the origin of species, that theory, as the explanation, must be considered as pro- visionally discredited. If other causes than Natural (including sexual) Selec- tion can be proved to have acted — if variation can in any cases be proved to be subject to certain determinations in special directions by other means than Natural Selection, it then becomes probable, a priori, that it is so in others, and that Natural Selection depends upon, and only supple- ments, such means, which conception is opposed to the pure Darwinian position. Now it is certain, a priori, that variation is obedient to some law, and therefore that " Natural Selection " itself must be capable of being subsumed into some higher law ; and it is evident, I believe, a posteriori, that Natural Se- lection is, at the very least, aided and supplemented by somfc other agency. Admitting, then, organic and other evolution, and that new forms of animals and plants (new species, genera, etc.) e. g., as the occasional reproduction, by individuals, of parts which they have lost ; the appearance in offspring of parental, and sometimes of re- mote ancestral, characters, etc. It accounts for these phenomena by supposing that every creature possesses countless indefinitely-minute organic atoms, termed "gemmules," which atoms are supposed to be generated in every part of every organ, to be in constant circulation about the body, and to have the power of reproduction. Moreover, atoms from every part are supposed to be stored in the generative prod- ucts. I.] INTRODUCTORY. 33 have from time to time been evolved from preceding ani- mals and plants, it follows, if the views here advocated are true, that this evolution has not taken place bj the action of " Natural Selection " alone, but through it (among other influences) aided by the concurrent action of some other nat- ural law or laws, at present undiscovered; and probably that the genesis of species takes place partly, perhaps mainly, through laws which may be most conveniently spoken of as special powers and tendencies existing in each organism ; and partly through influences exerted on each by surrounding conditions and agencies organic and inor- ganic, terrestrial and cosmical, among which the " survival of the fittest " plays a certain but subordinate part. The theory of " Natural Selection " may (though it need not) be taken in such a way as to lead men to regard the present organic world as formed, so to speak, accidentally, beautiful and wonderful as is confessedly the hap-hazard result. The same may perhaps be said with regard to the system advocated by Mr. Herbert Spencer, who, however, also relegates " Natural Selection " to a subordinate role. The view here advocated, on the other hand, regards the whole organic world as* arising and going forward in one harmonious development similar to that which displays it- self in the growth and action of each separate individual organism. It also regards each such separate organism as the expression of powers and tendencies not to be accounted for by " Natural Selection " alone, or even by that together with merely the direct influence of surrounding conditions. The difficulties which appear to oppose themselves to the reception of " Natural Selection " or " the survival of the fittest," as the one explanation of the origin of spe- cies, have no doubt been already considered by Mr. Dar- win. Nevertheless, it may be worth while to enumerate them, and to state the considerations which appear to give them weight ; and there is no doubt but that a naturalist 34 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP so candid and careful as the author of the theory in ques- tion, will feel obliged, rather than the reverse, by the sug- gestion of all the doubts and difficulties which can be brought against it. What is to be brought forward may be summed up as follows : That " Natural Selection " is incompetent to account for the incipient stages of useful structures. That it does not harmonize with the coexistence of closely-similar structures of diverse origin. That there are grounds for thinking that specific dif- ferences may be developed suddenly instead of gradually. That the opinion that species have definite though very different limits to their variability is still tenable. That certain fossil transitional forms are absent, which might have been expected to be present. That some facts of geographical distribution supple- ment other difficulties. That the objection drawn from the physiological dif- ference between " species " and " races " still exists unre- futed. That there are many remarkable phenomena in organic forms upon which " Natural Selection " throws no light whatever, but the explanations of which, if they could be attained, might throw light upon specific origination. Besides these objections to the sufficiency of "Natural Selection," others may be brought against the hypothesis of " Pangenesis," which, professing as it does to explain great difficulties, seems to do so by presenting others not less great — almost to be the explanation of obscurum per obscurius. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. CHAPTER II. THE INCOMPETENCY OF "NATURAL SELECTION" TO AC- COUNT FOE THE INCIPIENT STAGES OF USEFUL STRUCT- URES. Mr. Darwin supposes that Natural Selection acts by Slight Variations.— These must be useful at once. — Difficulties as to the Giraffe ; as to Mimicry ; as to the Heads of Flat-fishes ; as to the Origin and Constancy of the Vertebrate Limbs ; as to "Whale- bone ; as to the Young Kangaroo ; as to Sea-urchins ; as to certain Processes of Metamorphosis ; as to the Mammary -gland ; as to certain Ape Characters ; as to the Rattlesnake and Cobra ; as to the Process of Formation of the Eye and Ear , as to the Fully-developed Condition of the Eye and Ear ; as to the Voice; as to Shell- fish ; as to Orchids ; as to Ants. — the Necessity for the Simultaneous Modification of Many Individuals. — Summary and Conclusion. " NATURAL Selection," simply and by itself, is potent to explain the maintenance or the further extension and development of favorable variations, which are at once suf- ficiently considerable to be useful from the first to the indi- vidual possessing them. But Natural Selection utterly fails to account for the conservation and development of the minute and rudimentary beginnings, the slight and infini- tesimal commencements of structures, however useful those structures may afterward become. Now, it is distinctly enunciated by Mr. Darwin, that the spontaneous variations upon which his theory depends are individually slight, minute, and insensible. He says,1 " Slight individual differences, however, suffice for the work, and are probably the sole differences which are effec- tive in the production of new species." And again, after 1 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p 192 3tJ THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. mentioning the frequent sudden appearances of domestic varieties, he speaks of " the false belief as to the similarity of natural species in this respect." 2 In his work on the " Origin of Species," he also observes, " Natural Selection acts only by the preservation and accumulation of small inherited modifications." 3 And " Natural Selection, if it be a true principle, will banish the belief ... of any great and sudden modification in their structure." 4 Finally, he adds, " If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by nu- merous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." E Now the conservation of minute variations in many instances is, of course, plain and intelligible enough; such e. g., as those which tend to promote the destructive facul- ties of beasts of prey on the one hand, or to facilitate the flight or concealment of the animals pursued on the other ; provided always that these minute beginnings are of such a kind as really to have a certain efficiency, however small, in favor of the conservation of the individual possessing them ; and also provided that no unfavorable peculiarity in any other direction accompanies and neutralizes, in the struggle for life, the minute favorable variation. But some of the cases which have been brought for- ward, and which have met with very general acceptance, seem less satisfactory when carefully analyzed than they at first appear to be. Among these we may mention " the neck of the giraffe." At first sight it would seem as though a better exam- ple in support of " Natural Selection " could hardly have been chosen. Let the fact of the occurrence of occasional severe droughts in the country which that animal has in- 2 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 414. 3 "Origin of Species," 5th edit., 1869, p. 110. 4 Ibid., p. 111. 5Ibid., p. 227. II.J INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 37 habited be granted. In that case, when the ground vege- tation has been consumed, and the trees alone remain, it is plain that at such times only those individuals (of what we assume to be the nascent giraffe species) which were able to reach high up would be preserved, and would become the parents of the following generation, some individuals of which would, of course, inherit that high-reaching power which alone preserved their parents. Only the high-reach- ing issue of these high-reaching individuals would again, cceteris paribus, be preserved at the next drought, and would again transmit to their offspring their still loftier stature ; and so on, from period to period, through aeons of time, all the individuals tending to revert to the ancient shorter type of body, being ruthlessly destroyed at the oc- currence of each drought. (1.) But against this it may be said, in the first place, that the argument proves too much ; for, on this supposi- tion, many species must have tended to undergo a similar modification, and we ought to have at least several forms, similar to the giraffe, developed from different Ungulata.6 A careful observer of animal life, who has long resided in South Africa, explored the interior, and lived in the giraffe country, has assured the author that the giraffe has powers of locomotion and endurance fully equal to those possessed by any of the other Ungulata of that continent. It would seem, therefore, that some of these other Ungulates ought to have developed in a similar manner as to the neck, under pain of being starved, when the long heck of the giraffe was in its incipient stage. To this criticism it has been objected that different kinds of animals are preserved, in the struggle for life, in very different ways, and even that " high reaching " may be at- 6 The order Urtgulata contains the hoofed beasts ; that is, all oxen, deer, antelopes, sheep, goats, camels, hogs, the hippopotamus, the differ- ent kinds of rhinoceros, the tapirs, horses, asses, zebras, quaggas, etc. 38 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. tained in more modes than one — as, for example, by the trunk of the elephant. This is, indeed, true, but then none of the African Ungulata 7 have, nor do they appear ever to have had, any proboscis whatsoever; nor have they ac- quired such a development as to allow them to rise on their hind-limbs and graze on trees in a kangaroo attitude, nor a power of climbing, nor, as far as known, any other modifi- cation tending to compensate for the comparative shortness of the neck. Again, it may perhaps be said that leaf-eating forms are exceptional, and that therefore the struggle to attain high branches would not affect many Ungulates. But surely, when these severe droughts necessary for the theory occur, the ground vegetation is supposed to be exhausted ; and, indeed, the giraffe is quite capable of feed- ing from off the ground. So that, in these cases, the other Ungulata must have taken to leaf-eating or have starved, and thus must have had any accidental long-necked varieties favored and preserved exactly as the long-necked varieties of the giraffe are supposed to have been favored and pre- served. The argument as to the different modes of preservation has been very well put by Mr. Wallace,8 in reply to the objection that " color, being dangerous, should not exist in Nature." This objection appears similar to mine ; as I say that a giraffe neck, being needful, there should be many animals with it, while the objector noticed by Mr. Wallace says, " A dull color being needful, all animals should be so colored." And Mr. Wallace shows in reply how porcupines, tortoises, and mussels, very hard-coated bombadier beetles, stinging insects, and nauseous-tasted caterpillars, can afford to be brilliant by the various means of active defence or passive protection they possess, other than obscure colora- 7 The elephants of Africa and India, with their extinct allies, consti. tute the order Proboscidea, and do not belong to the Ungulata. 8 See " Natural Selection," pp. 60-75. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 39 tion. He says : " The attitudes of some insects may also protect them, as the habit of turning up the tail by the harmless rove-beetles (Staphylinidae), no doubt leads other animals, besides children, to the belief that they can sting. The curious attitude assumed by sphinx caterpillars is prob- ably a safeguard, as well as the blood-red tentacles which can suddenly be thrown out from the neck by the caterpil- lars of all the true swallow-tailed butterflies." But, because many different kinds of animals can elude the observation or defy the attack of enemies in a great variety of ways, it by no means follows that there are any similar number and variety of ways for attaining vegetable food in a country where all such food, other than the lofty branches of trees, has been for a time destroyed. In such a country we have a number of vegetable-feeding Un- gulates, all of which present minute variations as to the length of the neck. If, as Mr. Darwin contends, the natural selection of these favorable variations has alone lengthened the neck of the giraffe by preserving it during droughts ; similar variations, in similarly feeding forms, at the same times, ought similarly to have been preserved and so length- ened the neck of some other Ungulates by similarly pre- serving them during the same droughts. (2.) It may be also objected, that the power of reaching upward, acquired by the lengthening of the neck and legs, must have necessitated a considerable increase in the entire size and mass of the body (larger bones requiring stronger and more voluminous muscles and tendons, and these again necessitating larger nerves, more capacious blood- vessels, etc.), and it is very problematical whether the dis- advantages thence arising would not, in times of scarcity, more than counterbalance the advantages. For a considerable increase in the supply of food would be requisite on account of this increase in size and mass, while at the same time there would be a certain decrease 40 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. in strength ; for, as Mr. Herbert Spencer says,0 " It is de- monstrable that the excess of absorbed over expended nu- triment must, other things equal, become less as the size of an animal becomes greater. In similarly-shaped bodies, the masses vary as the cubes of the dimensions ; whereas the strengths vary as the squares of the dimensions." . . . " Supposing a creature which a year ago was one foot high, has now become two feet high, while it is unchanged in proportions and structure — what are the necessary con- comitant changes that have taken place in it ? It is eight times as heavy ; that is to say, it has to resist eight times the strain which gravitation puts on its structure; and in producing, as well as in arresting, every one of its move- ments, it has to overcome eight times the inertia. Mean- while, the muscles and bones have severally increased their contractile and resisting powers, in proportion to the areas of their transverse sections ; and hence are severally but four times as strong as they were. Thus, while the creature has doubled in height, and while its ability to overcome forces has quadrupled, the forces it has to overcome have grown eight times as great. Hence, to raise its body through a given space, its muscles have to be contracted with twice the intensity, at a double cost of matter ex- pended." Again, as to the cost at which nutriment is dis- tributed through the body, and effete matters removed from it, " Each increment of growth being added at the periphery of an organism, the force expended in the transfer of mat- ter must increase in a rapid progression — a progression more rapid than that of the mass." There is yet another point. Vast as may have been the time during which the. process of evolution has continued, it is, nevertheless, not infinite. Yet, as every kind, on the Darwinian hypothesis, varies slightly but indefinitely ni every organ and every part of every organ, how very gen- 9 "Principles of Biology," vol. i., p. 122. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 41 erally must favorable variations as to the length of the neck have been accompanied by some unfavorable variation in some other part, neutralizing the action of the favorable one, the latter, moreover, only taking effect during these periods of drought ! How often must not individuals, fa- vored by a slightly-increased length of neck, have failed to enjoy the elevated foliage which they had not strength or endurance to attain ; while other individuals, exceptionally robust, could struggle on yet further till they arrived at vegetation within their reach ! However, allowing this example to pass, many other in- stances will be found to present great difficulties. Let us take the cases of mimicry among lepidoptera and other insects. Of this subject Mr. Wallace has given a most interesting and complete account,10 showing in how many and strange instances this superficial resemblance by one creature to some other quite distinct creature acts as a safe- guard to the first. One or two instances must here suffice. In South America there is a family of butterflies, termed Seliconidce^ which are very conspicuously colored and slow in flight, and yet the individuals abound in prodigious num- bers, and take no precautions to conceal themselves, even when at rest, during the night. Mr. Bates (the author of the very interesting work " The Naturalist on the River Amazons," and the discoverer of " Mimicry ") found that these conspicuous butterflies had a very strong and disa- greeable odor ; so much so that any one handling them and squeezing them, as a collector must do, has his fingers stained and so infected by the smell, as to require time and much trouble to remove it. It is suggested that this unpleasant quality is the cause of the abundance of the Heliconidae ; Mr. Bates and other observers reporting that they have never seen them at- 10 See " Natural Selection," chap, iii., p. 45. 42 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. tacked by the birds, reptiles, or insects, which prey upon other lepidoptera. Now it is a curious fact that very different South Amer- ican butterflies put on, as it were, the exact dress of these offensive beauties and mimic them even in their mode of flight. In explaining the mode of action of this protecting re- semblance Mr. Wallace observes : " " Tropical insectivorous birds very frequently sit on dead branches of a lofty tree, or on those which overhang forest-paths, gazing intently around, and darting off at intervals to seize an insect at a considerable distance, with which they generally return to their station to devour. If a bird began by capturing the slow-flying conspicuous Heliconidas, and found them always so disagreeable that it could not eat them, it would after a very few trials leave off catching them at all ; and their whole appearance, form, coloring, and mode of flight, is so peculiar, that there can be little doubt birds would soon learn to distinguish them at a long distance, and never waste any time in pursuit of them. Under these circum- stances, it is evident that any other butterfly of a group which birds were accustomed to devour, would be almost equally well protected by closely resembling a Heliconia externally, as if it acquired also the disagreeable odor ; always supposing that there were only a few of them among a great number of Heliconias." " The approach in color and form to the Heliconidas, however, would be at the first a positive, though perhaps a slight, advantage ; for although at short distances this va- riety would be easily distinguished and devoured, yet at a longer distance it might be mistaken for one of the uneat- able group, and so be passed by and gain another day's life, which might in many cases be sufficient for it to lay a quantity of eggs and leave a numerous progeny, many of 11 Loc. cit., p. 80. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. which would inherit the peculiarity which had been the safeguard of their parent." LEAF BITTTEEFLT IX FLIGHT AXD REPOSE. (From Jlr. Wallaces " Malay Archipelago."1') As a complete example of mimicry Mr. Wallace refers 44 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP, to a common Indian butterfly. He says : 12 " But the most wonderful and undoubted case of protective resemblance in a butterfly, which I have ever seen, is that of the common Indian ICallima inachis, and its Malayan ally, Kallima paralekta. The upper surface of these is very striking and showy, as they are of a large size, and are adorned with a broad band of rich orange on a deep-bluish ground. The under side is very variable in color, so that out of fifty specimens no two can be found exactly alike, but every one of them will be of some shade of ash, or brown, or ochre, such as are found among dead, dry, or decaying leaves. The apex of the upper wings is produced into an acute point, a very common form in the leaves of tropical shrubs and trees, and the lower wings are also produced into a short, narrow tail. Between these two points runs a dark curved line exactly representing the midrib of a leaf, and from this radiate on each side a few oblique lines, which serve to indicate the lateral veins of a leaf. These marks are more clearly seen on the outer portion of the base of the wings, and on the inner side toward the middle and apex, and it is very curious to observe how the usual mar- ginal and transverse striae of the group are here modified and strengthened so as to become adapted for an imitation of the venation of a leaf." ..." But this resemblance, close as it is, would be of little use if the habits of the in- sect did not accord with it. If the butterfly sat upon leaves or upon flowers, or opened its wings so as to expose the upper surface, or exposed and moved its head and antennae as many other butterflies do, its disguise would be of little avail. We might be sure, however, from the analogy of many other cases, that the habits of the insect are such as still further to aid its deceptive garb ; but we are not obliged to make any such supposition, since I myself had the good fortune to observe scores of HEdHima paralekta, 12 Loc. cit., p. 59. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 45 in Sumatra, and to capture many of them, and can vouch for the accuracy of the following details. These butterflies frequent dry forests, and fly very swiftly. They were seen to settle on a flower or a green leaf, but were many times lost sight of in a bush or tree of dead leaves. On such oc- casions they were generally searched for in vain, for while gazing intently at the very spot where one had disappeared, it would often suddenly dart out, :and again vanish twenty or fifty yards farther on. On one or two occasions the in- sect was detected reposing, and it could then be seen how completely it assimilates itself to the surrounding leaves. It sits on a nearly upright twig, the wings fitting closely back to back, concealing the antennae and head, which are drawn up between their bases. The little tails of the hind- wing touch the branch, and form a perfect stalk to the leaf, which is supported in its place by the claws of the middle pair of feet, which are slender and inconspicuous. The irregular outline of the wings gives exactly the perspective effect of a shrivelled leaf. We thus have size, color, form, markings, and habits, all combining together to produce a disguise which may be said to be absolutely perfect ; and the protection which it affords is sufficiently indicated by the abundance of the individuals that possess it." Beetles also imitate bees and wasps, as do some Lepi- doptera ; and objects the most bizarre and unexpected are simulated, such as dung and drops of dew. Some insects, called bamboo and walking-stick insects, have a most re- markable resemblance to pieces of bamboo, to twigs and branches. Of these latter insects Mr. Wallace says : 13 " Some of these are a foot long and as thick as one's finger, and their whole coloring, form, rugosity, and the arrange- ment of the head, legs, and antennae, are such as to render them absolutely identical in appearance with dry sticks. They hang loosely about shrubs in the forest, and have the 13 Loc. cit., p. 64. 46 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. extraordinary habit of stretching out their legs unsymmetri- cally, so as to render the deception more complete." Now let us suppose that the ancestors of these various animals were all destitute of the very special protections they at present possess, as on the Darwinian hypothesis we must do. Let it also be conceded that small deviations from the antecedent coloring or form would tend to make some of their ancestors escape destruction by causing them more or less frequently to be passed over, or mistaken by their persecutors. Yet the deviation must, as the event has shown, in each case be in some definite direction, whether it be toward some other animal or plant, or toward some dead or inorganic matter. But as, according to Mr. Dar- win's theory, there is a constant tendency to indefinite vari- ation, and as the minute incipient variations will be in all directions, they must tend to neutralize each other, and at first to form such unstable modifications that it is difficult, if not impossible, to see how such indefinite oscillations of infinitesimal beginnings can ever build up a sufficiently ap- preciable resemblance to a leaf, bamboo, or other object, for "Natural Selection" to seize upon and perpetuate. This difficulty is augmented when we consider — a point to be dwelt upon hereafter — how necessary it is that many in- dividuals should be similarly modified simultaneously. This has been insisted on in an able article in the North British Review for June, 1867, p. 286, and the consideration of the article has occasioned Mr. Darwin to make an important modification in his views. 14 In these cases of mimicry it seems difficult indeed to im- agine a reason why variations tending in an infinitesimal degree in any special direction should be preserved. All variations would be preserved which tended to obscure the perception of an animal by its enemies, whatever direction those variations might take, and the common preservation 14 " Origin of Species.'1 5th edit., p. 104. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. of conflicting tendencies would greatly favor their mutual neutralization and obliteration if we may rely on the many cases recently brought forward by Mr. Darwin with regard to domestic animals. Mr. Darwin explains the imitation of some species by others more or less nearly allied to it, by the common origin of both the mimic and the mimicked species, and the conse- 5 ,-, THE WALKING-LEAF INSECT qnent possession by both (according to the theory of " Pan- genesis ") of gem mules tending to reproduce ancestral characters, which characters the mimic must be assumed first to have lost and then to have recovered. Mr. Darwin says,16 " Varieties of one species frequently mimic distinct species, a fact in perfect harmony with the foregoing cases, 15 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 351, 48 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. |_CHAP- and explicable only on the theory of descent." But this at the best is but a partial and very incomplete explanation. It is one, moreover, which Mr. Wallace does not accept.18 It is very incomplete, because it has no bearing on some of the most striking cases, and of course Mr. Darwin does not pretend that it has. We should have to go back far indeed to reach the common ancestor of the mimicking walking- leaf insect and the real leaf it mimics, or the original pro- genitor of both the bamboo insect and the bamboo itself. As these last most remarkable cases have certainly nothing to do with heredity,17 it is unwarrantable to make use of that explanation for other protective resemblances, seeing that its inapplicability, in certain instances, is so manifest. Again, at the other end of the process it is as difficult to account for the last touches of perfection in the mimicry. Some insects which imitate leaves extend the imitation even to the very injuries on those leaves made by the at- tacks of insects or of fungi. Thus, speaking of one of the walking-stick insects, Mr. Wallace says : 18 " One of these creatures obtained by myself in Borneo ( Ceroxylus lacera- tus) was covered over with foliaceous excrescences of a clear olive-green color, so as exactly to resemble a stick grown over by a creeping moss or jungermannia. The Dyak who brought it me assured me it was grown over with moss, although alive, and it was only after a most mi- nute examination that I could convince myself it was not so." Again, as to the leaf-butterfly, he says : 19 " We come to a still more extraordinary part of the imitation, for we find representations of leaves in every stage of decay, vari- ously blotched, and mildewed, and pierced with holes, and in many cases irregularly covered with powdery black dots, 16 Loc. cit., pp. 109, 110. 17 Heredity is the term used to denote the tendency which there is in offspring to reproduce parental features. 18 Loc. cit., p. 64. »9 Loc. cit., p. 60. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 49 gathered into patches and spots, so closely resembling the various kinds of minute fungi that grow on dead leaves, that it is impossible to avoid thinking at first sight that the butterflies themselves have been attacked by real fungi," Here imitation has attained a development which seems utterly beyond the power of the mere " survival of the fit- test " to produce. How this double mimicry can impor- tantly aid in the struggle for life seems puzzling indeed, but much more so how the first faint beginnings of the im- itation of such injuries in the leaf can be developed in the animal into such a complete representation of them — a for- tiori how simultaneous and similar first beginnings of imi- tations of such injuries could ever have been developed in several individuals, out of utterly indifierent and indetermi- nate infinitesimal variations in all conceivable directions. Another instance which may be cited is the asymmetrical condition of the heads of the flat-fishes (Pleuronectidae), such as the sole, the flounder, the brill, the turbot, etc. In PLETEONECTrD^E, WITH TUB PECrXIABLY-PLACED EYE IN DIFFEBENT POSITIONS. (From Dr. Traquair's paper in the " Transactions of the Linnean Society, 1865.") all these fishes the two eyes, which in the young are situ- ated as usual one on each side, come to be placed, in the adult, both on the same side of the head. If this condi- 3 50 • THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. tion had appeared at once, if in the hypothetically fortu- nate common ancestor of these fishes an eye had suddenly become thus transferred, then the perpetuation of such a transformation by the action of " Natural Selection " is conceivable enough. Such sudden changes, however, are not those favored by the Darwinian theory, and indeed the accidental occurrence of such a spontaneous transformation is hardly conceivable. But if this is not so, if the transit was gradual, then how such transit of one eye a minute fraction of the journey toward the other side of the head could bene- fit the individual is indeed far from clear. It seems, even, that such an incipient transformation must rather have been injurious. Another point with regard to these flat-fishes is that they appear to be in all probability of recent origin — i. e., geologically speaking. There is, of course, no great stress to be laid on the mere absence of their remains from the secondary strata, nevertheless that absence is notewor- thy, seeing that existing fish families, e. g., sharks (Squa- lidae), have been found abundantly, even down so far as the carboniferous rocks, and traces of them in the Upper Silurian. Another difficulty seems to be the first formation of the limbs of the higher animals. The lowest Vertebrata30 are perfectly limbless, and if, as most Darwinians would prob- ably assume, the primeval vertebrate creature was also apodal, how are the preservation and development of the first rudiments of limbs to be accounted for — such rudi- ments being, on the hypothesis in question, infinitesimal and functionless ? In reply to this, it has been suggested that a mere flat- tening of the end of the body has been useful, such, e. g., as 20 The term " Vertebrata " denotes that large group of animals which are characterized by the possession of a spinal column, commonly known as the " backbone." Such animals are ourselves, together with all beasts^ birds, reptiles, frogs, toads, and efts, and also fishes. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 51 we see in sea-snakes,21 which may be the rudiment of a tail formed strictly to aid in swimming. Also that a mere rough- ness of the skin might be useful to a swimming animal by holding the water better, that thus minute processes might be selected and preserved, and that, in the same way, these might be gradually increased into limbs. But it is, to say the least, very questionable whether a roughness of the skin, or minute processes, would be useful to a swimming animal ; the motion of which they would as much impede as aid, unless they were at once capable of a suitable and appropriate action, which is against the hypothesis. Again, the change from mere indefinite and accidental processes to two regular pairs of symmetrical limbs, as the result of merely fortuitous, favoring variations, is a step the feasibil- ity of which hardly commends itself to the reason, seeing the very different positions assumed by the ventral fins in different fishes. If the above suggestion made in opposi- tion to the views here asserted be true, then the general constancy of position of the limbs of vertebrata may be considered as due to the position assumed by the primitive rugosities from which those limbs were generated. Clearly only two pairs of rugosities were so preserved and devel- oped, and all limbs (on this view) are descendants of the same two pairs, as all have so similar a fundamental struct- ure. Yet we find in many fishes the pair of fins, which correspond to the hinder limbs of other animals, placed so far forward as to be either on the same level with, or actu- ally in front of, the normally anterior pair of limbs ; and such fishes are from this circumstance called " thoracic," or " jugular " fishes respectively, as the weaver-fishes and the cod. This is a wonderful contrast to the fixity of position of vertebrate limbs generally. If, then, such a change can 81 It is hardly necessary to observe that these " sea-snakes " have no relation to the often-talked-of " sea-serpent." They are small, venomous reptiles, which abound in the Indian seas. THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. have taken place in the comparatively short time occupied by the evolution of these special fish forms, we might cer- tainly expect other and far more bizarre structures would (did not some law forbid) have been developed from other rugosities, in the manifold exigencies of the multitudinous organisms which must (on the Darwinian hypothesis) have been gradually evolved during the enormous period inter- vening between the first appearance of vertebrate life and the present day. Yet with these exceptions, the position of the limbs is constant from the lower fishes up to man, there being always an anterior pectoral pair placed in front of a posterior or pelvic pair when both are present, and in no single instance are there more than these two pairs. MOUTH OF A WHALE. The development of whalebone (baleen) in the, mouth of the whale is another difficulty. A whale's mouth is fur- II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 53 nished with very numerous horny plates, which hang down from the palate along each side of the mouth. They thus form two longitudinal series, each plate of which is placed transversely to the long axis of the body, and all are very close together. On depressing the lower lip the free outer edges of these plates come into view. Their inner edges are furnished with numerous coarse hair-like processes, consist- ing of some of the constituent fibres of the horny plates — which, as it were, fray out — and the mouth is thus lined, except below, by a net-work of countless fibres formed by the inner edges of the two series of plates. This net-work acts as a sort of sieve. When the whale feeds it takes into its mouth a great gulp of water, which it drives out again through the intervals of the horny plates of baleen, the fluid thus traversing the sieve of horny fibres, which retains the mi- nute creatures on which these marine mon- sters subsist. Now it is obvious, that if this baleen had once attained such a size and de- velopment as to be at all useful, then its pres- ervation and augmentation within service- able limits would be promoted by " Natural Selection " alone. But how to obtain the FOUR PLATES OF BALEEN SEEN OBLIQUELY FROM WITHIN. 54 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. beginning of such useful development ? There are indeed certain animals of exclusively aquatic habits (the dugong and manatee) which also possess more or less horn on the palate, and at first sight this might be taken as a mitiga- tion of the difficulty ; but it is not so, and the fact does not help us one step further along the road : for, in the first place, these latter animals differ so importantly in structure from whales and porpoises that they form an al- together distinct order, and cannot be thought to approxi- mate to the whale's progenitors. They are vegetarians, the whales feed on animals ; the former never have the ribs ar- ticulated in the mode in which they are in some of the lat- ter ; the former have pectoral mammse, and the latter are provided with two inguinal mammary glands, and have the nostrils enlarged into blowers, which the former have not. The former thus constitute the order Sirenia, while the lat- ter belong to the Cetacea. In the second place, the horny matter on the palates of the dugong and manatee has not, even initially, that " strainer " action which is the characteristic function of the Cetacean " baleen." There is another very curious structure, the origin or the disappearance of which it seems impossible to account for on the hypothesis of minute indefinite variations. It is that of the mouth of the young kangaroo. In all mam- mals, as in ourselves, the air-passage from the lungs opens in the floor of the mouth behind the tongue, and in front of the opening of the gullet, so that each particle of food as it is swallowed passes over the opening, but is prevented from falling into it (and thus causing death from choking) by the action of a small cartilaginous shield (the epiglottis), which at the right moment bends back and protects the ori- fice. Now the kangaroo is born in such an exceedingly imperfect and undeveloped condition, that it is quite unable to suck. The mother, therefore, places the minute blind and naked young upon the nipple, and then injects milk II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 55 into it bj means of a special muscular envelope of the mammary gland. Did no special provision exist, the young one must infallibly be choked by the intrusion of the milk into the windpipe. But there is a special provision. The larynx is so elongated that it rises up into the posterior end of the nasal passage, and is thus enabled to give free entrance to the air for the lungs, while the milk passes harmlessly on each side of this elongated larynx, and so safely attains the gullet behind it Now, on the Darwinian hypothesis, either all mammals descended from marsupial progenitors, or else the marsu- pials sprung from animals having in most respects the or- dinary mammalian structure. On the first alternative, how did " Natural Selection " remove this (at least perfectly innocent and harmless) struct- ure in almost all other mammals, and, having done so, again reproduce it hi precisely those forms which alone re- quire it, namely, the Cetacea ? That such a harmless struct- ure need not be removed, any Darwinian njust confess, since a structure exists in both the crocodiles and gavials, which enables the former to breathe themselves while drowning the prey which they hold in their mouths. On Mr. Darwin's hypothesis it could only have been developed where useful, therefore not in the gavials (1) which feed on fish, but which yet retain, as we might expect, this, in them, superfluous but harmless formation. On the second alternative, how did the elongated larynx itself arise, seeing that if its development lagged behind that of the maternal structure, the young primeval kanga- roo must be choked ; while, without the injecting power in the mother, it must be starved ? The struggle by the sole action of which such a form was developed must indeed have been severe ! The sea-urchins (Echinus) present us also with structures the origin of which it seems impossible to explain by the 56 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. action of " Natural Selection " only. These lowly animals belong to that group of the star-fish class (Echinodermata), the species of which possess generally spheroidal bodies, built up of multitudinous calcareous plates, and constitute AN ECHINUS, OB 8EA-TJECHIN. (The spines removed from one-half.) * the order Echinoidea. They are also popularly known as sea-eggs. Utterly devoid of limbs, the locomotion of these creatures is effected by means of rows of small tubular suckers (which protrude through pores in the calcareous plates), and by movable spines scattered over the body. Besides these spines and suckers there are certain very peculiar structures, termed " Pedicellariae." Each of these consists of a long slender stalk, ending in three short limbs — or rather jaws — the whole supported by a delicate inter- nal skeleton. The three limbs (or jaws), which start from a common point at the end of the stalk, are in the constant habit of opening and closing together again with a snap- ping action, while the stalk itself sways about. The utility of these appendages is, even now, problematical. It may be that they remove from the surface of the animal's body foreign substances which would be prejudicial to it, and IL] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 57 which it cannot otherwise get rid of. But granting this, what would be the utility of the first rudi- mentary beginnings of such structures, and how could such incipient buddings have ever preserved the life of a single Echinus ? It is true that on Darwinian principles the ances- tral form from which the sea-urchin developed was different, and must not be conceived merely as an Echinus devoid of pedicellariae ; but this makes the difficulty none the less. It is equally hard to imagine that the first rudiments of such structures could have been useful to any animal from which the Echinus might have been derived. Moreover, not even the sudden development of the snap- ping action could have been beneficial with- out the freely movable stalk, nor could the latter have been efficient without the snap- ping jaws, yet no minute merely indefinite variations could simultaneously evolve these complex coordinations of structure ; to deny this seems to do no less than to affirm a start- ling paradox. Mr. Darwin explains the appearance of some structures, the utility of which is not apparent, by the existence of certain " laws of correlation." By these he means that certain parts or organs of the body are so related to other organs or parts, that when the first are modified by the action of " Natural Selection," or what not, the second are simul- taneously affected, and increase proportionally or possibly so decrease. Examples of such are the hair and teeth in the naked Turkish dog, the general deafness of white cats with blue eyes, the relation between the presence of more or less down on young birds when first hatched, and PEDICEIXABIJ (Immensely enlarged.) 58 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. the future color of their plumage,22 with many others. But the idea that the modification of any internal or external part of the body of an Echinus carries with it the effect of producing elongated, flexible, triradiate, snapping processes, is, to say the very least, fully as obscure and mysterious as what is here contended for, viz., the efficient presence of an unknown internal natural law or laws conditioning the evo- lution of new specific forms from preceding ones, modified by the action of surrounding conditions, by " Natural Se- lection," and by other controlling influences. The same difficulty seems to present itself in other ex- amples of exceptional structure and action. In the same Echinus, as in many allied forms, and also in some more or less remote ones, a very peculiar mode of development exists. The adult is not formed from the egg directly, but the egg gives rise to a creature which swims freely about, feeds, am^is even somewhat complexly organized. Soon a small lump appears on one side of its stomach ; this en- larges, and, having established a communication with the exterior, envelops and appropriates the creature's stomach, with which it swims away and develops into the complete adult form, while the dispossessed individual perishes. Again, certain flies present a mode of development equally bizarre, though quite different. In these flies, the grub is, as usual, produced from the ovum, but this grub, instead of growing up into the adult in the ordinary way, undergoes a sort of liquefaction of a great part of its body, while certain patches of formative tissue, which are attached to the ramifying air-tubes, or tracheae (and which patches bear the name of " imaginal disks "), give rise to the legs, wings, eyes, etc., respectively ; and these severally-formed parts grow together, and build up the head and body by their mutual approximation. Such a process is unknown outside the class of insects, and inside that class it is only 22 "Origin of Species," 5th edit., 1869, p. 179. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 59 known in a few of the two-winged flies. Now, how " Nat- ural Selection," or any " laws of correlation," can account for the gradual development of such an exceptional process of development — so extremely divergent from that of other insects — seems nothing less than inconceivable. Mr. Dar- win himself 23 gives an account of a very peculiar and ab- normal mode of development of a certain beetle, the sitaris, as described by M. Fabre. This insect, instead of at first appearing in its grub stage, and then, after a time, putting on the adult form, is at first active and furnished with six legs, two long antennae, and four eyes. Hatched in the nests of bees, it at first attaches itself to one of the males, and then crawls, when the opportunity offers, upon a female bee. When the female bee lays her eggs, the young sitaris springs upon them and devours them. Then, losing its eyes, legs, and antennae, and becoming rudimentary, it sinks into an. ordinary grub-like form, and feeds on honey, ultimately undergoing another transformation, reacquiring its legs, etc., and emerging a perfect beetle ! That such a process should have arisen by the accumulation of minute accidental variations in structure and habit, appears to many minds, quite competent to form an opinion on the subject, absolutely incredible. It may be objected, perhaps, that these difficulties are difficulties of ignorance — that we cannot explain them be- cause we do not know enough of the animals. But it is here contended that this is not the case ; it is not that we merely fail to see how " Natural Selection " acted, but that there is a positive incompatibility between the cause as- signed and the results. It will be stated shortly what won- derful instances of coordination and of unexpected utility Mr. Darwin has discovered in orchids. The discoveries are not disputed or undervalued, but the explanation of their origin is deemed thoroughly unsatisfactory — utterly insuf- 28 " Origin of Species," 6th edit., p. 632. 60 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. ficient to explain the incipient, infinitesimal beginnings of structures which are of utility only when they are consider- ably developed. Let us consider the mammary gland, or breast. Is it conceivable that the young of any animal was ever saved from destruction by accidentally sucking a drop of scarcely nutritious fluid from an accidentally hypertrophied cutaneous gland of its mother ? And, even if one was so, what chance was there of the perpetuation of such a variation ? On the hypothesis of " Natural Selection " itself, we must assume that up to that time the race had been well adapted to the surrounding conditions ; the temporary and accidental trial and change of conditions, which caused the so-sucking young one to be the "fittest to survive" under the supposed cir- cumstances, would soon cease to act, and then the progeny of the mother, with the accidentally hypertrophied, seba- ceous glands, would have no tendency to survive the far outnumbering descendants of the normal ancestral form. If, on the other hand, we assume the change of conditions not to have been temporary but permanent, and also assume that this permanent change of conditions was accidentally synchronous with the change of structure, we have a coin- cidence of very remote probability indeed. But if, again, we accept the presence of some harmonizing law simulta- neously determining the two changes, or connecting the second with the first by causation, then, of course, we re- move the accidental character of the coincidence. Again, how explain the external position of the male sexual glands in certain mammals? The utility of the modification, when accomplished, is problematical enough, and no less so the incipient stages of the descent. As was said in the first chapter, Mr. Darwin explains the brilliant plumage of the peacock or the humming-bird by the action of sexual selection : the more and more bril- liant males being selected by the females (which are thus II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 61 attracted) to become the fathers of the next generation, to which generation they tend to communicate their own bright nuptial vesture. But there are peculiarities of color and of form which it is exceedingly difficult to account for by any such action. Thus, among apes, the female is no- toriously weaker, and is armed with much less powerful canine tusks than the male. When we consider what is known of the emotional nature of these animals, and the periodicity of its intensification, it is hardly credible that a female would often risk life or limb through her admiration of a trifling shade of color, or an infinitesimally greater though irresistibly fascinating degree of wartiness.24 Yet the males of some kinds of ape are adorned with quite exceptionally brilliant local decoration, and the male orang is provided with remarkable, projecting, warty lumps of skin upon the cheeks. As we have said, the weaker female can hardly be supposed to have developed these by persevering and long-continued selection, nor can they be thought to tend to the preservation of the individual. On the contrary, the presence of this enlarged appendage must occasion a slight increase in the need of nutriment, and in so far must be a detriment, although its detrimental effect would not be worth speaking of except in relation to " Darwinism," according to which, " selection " has acted through unimaginable ages, and has ever tended to sup- press any useless development by the struggle for life." 84 Mr. A. D. Bartlett, of the Zoological Society, informs me that at these periods female apes admit with perfect readiness the access of any males of different species. To be sure this is hi confinement ; but the fact is, I think, quite conclusive against any such sexual selection in a state of nature as would account for the local coloration referred to. 25 Mr. Darwin, in the last (fifth) edition of "Natural Selection," 1869, p. 102, admits that all sexual differences are not to be attributed to the agency of sexual selection, mentioning the wattle of carrier-pigeons, tuft of turkey-cock, etc. These characters, however, seem less inexplicable by sexual selection than those given in the text. 62 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. In poisonous serpents, also, we have structures which, at all events, at first sight, seem positively hurtful to those reptiles. Such are the rattle of the rattlesnake, and the expanding neck of the cobra, the former seeming to warn the ear of the intended victim, as the latter warns the eye. It is true we cannot perhaps demonstrate that the victims RATTLESNAKE. are alarmed and warned, but, on Darwinian principles, they certainly ought to be so. For the rashest and most incau- tious of the animals preyed on would always tend to fall victims, and the existing individuals being the long-de- scended progeny of the timid and cautious, ought to have an inherited tendency to distrust, among other things, both H.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 63 " rattling " and " expanding " snakes. As to any power of fascination exercised by means of these actions, the most distinguished naturalists, certainly the most distin- guished erpetologists, entirely deny it, and it is opposed to the careful observations of those known to us.28 COBEA. (Copied, by permte*ion,fr&m Sir Andrew SmitK* "Septiles of South Africa?) The mode of formation of both the eye and the ear of the highest animals is such that, if it is (as most Darwini- ans assert processes of development to be) a record of the actual steps by which such structures were first evolved in antecedent forms, it almost amounts to a demonstration 26 1 am again indebted to the kindness of Mr. A. D. Bartlett, among others. That gentleman informs me that, so far from any mental emo- tion being produced in rabbits by the presence and movements of snakes, he has actually seen a male and female rabbit satisfy the sexual instinct in that presence, a rabbit being seized by a snake when in coitu. 64 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. that those steps were never produced by " Natural Selec- tion." The eye is formed by a simultaneous and corresponding ingrowth of one part and outgrowth of another. The skin in front of the future eye becomes depressed, the depres- sion increases and assumes the form of a sac, which changes into the aqueous humor and lens. An outgrowth of brain-substance, on the other hand, forms the retina, while a third process is a lateral ingrowth of connective tissue, which afterward changes into the vitreous humor of the eye. The internal ear is formed by an involution of the in- tegument, and not by an outgrowth of the brain. But tis- sue, in connection with it, becomes in part changed, thus forming the auditory nerve, which places the tegumentary sac in direct communication with the brain itself. Now, these complex and simultaneous coordinations could never have been produced by infinitesimal begin- nings, since, until so far developed as to effect the requi-* site junctions, they are useless. But the eye and ear when fully developed present conditions which are hopelessly dif- ficult to reconcile with the mere action of " Natural Selec- tion." The difficulties with regard to the eye had been well put by Mr. Murphy, especially that of the concordant result of visual development springing from different start- ing-points and continued on by independent roads. He says,27 speaking of the beautiful structure of the perfect eye, " The higher the organization, whether of an entire organism or of a single organ, the greater is the number of the parts that cooperate, and the more perfect is their cooperation ; and consequently, the more necessity there is for corresponding variations to take place in all the cooperating parts at once, and the more useless will be any variation whatever unless it is accompanied by correspond- 27 " Habit and Intelligence," vol. i., p. 319. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 65 ing variations in the cooperating parts ; while it is obvious that the greater the number of variations which are needed in order to effect an improvement, the less will be the probability of their all occurring at once. It is no reply to this to say, what is no doubt abstractedly true, that what- ever is possible becomes probable, if only time enough be allowed. There are improbabilities so great that the com- mon-sense of mankind treats them as impossibilities. It is not, for instance, in the strictest sense of the word, im- possible that a poem and a mathematical proposition should be obtained by the process of shaking letters out of a box -, but it is improbable to a degree that cannot be distin- guished from impossibility ; and the improbability of ob- taining an improvement in an organ by means of several spontaneous variations, all occurring together, is an im- probability of the same kind. If we suppose that any single variation occurs on the average once in m times, the probability of that variation occurring in any individual will be— " and suppose that x variations must concur in order to make an improvement, then the probability of the necessary vari- ations all occurring together will be Jt m*. Now suppose, what I think a moderate proposition, that the value of m is 1,000, and the value of x is 10, then — !_ 1 1 . m' ~ 100010 7 1030' A number about ten thousand times as great as the number of waves of light that have fallen on the earth since histori- cal time began. And it is to be further observed, that no improvement will give its possessor a certainty of surviving 66 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP and leaving offspring, but only an extra chance, the value of which it is quite impossible to estimate." This difficulty is, as Mr. Murphy points out, greatly intensified by the un- doubted fact that the wonderfully complex structure has been arrived at quite independently in beasts on the one hand and in cuttle-fishes on the other ; while creatures of the insect and crab division present us with a third and. quite separately developed complexity. As to the ear, it would take up too much space to de- scribe its internal structure ; 28 it must suffice to say that in its interior there is an immense series of minute rod-like bodies, termed fibres of Corti, having the appearance of a key-board, and each fibre being connected with a filament of the auditory nerve, these nerves being like strings to be struck by the keys, i. e., by the fibres of Corti. Moreover, this apparatus is supposed to be a key-board in function as well as in appearance, the vibration of each one fibre giving rise, it is believed, to the sensation of one particular tone, and combinations of such vibrations producing chords. It is by the action of this complex organ, then, that all the wonderful intricacy and beauty of Beethoven and Mozart come, most probably, to be perceived and appreciated. Now, it can hardly be contended that the preservation of any race of men in the struggle for life ever depended on such an extreme delicacy and refinement of the internal ear — a perfection only exercised in the enjoyment and ap- preciation of the most perfect musical performances. How, then, could either the minute incipient stages, or the final perfecting touches of this admirable structure, have been brought about by vague, aimless, and indefinite variations in all conceivable directions of an organ, suitable to en- able the rudest savage to minister to his necessities, but no more ? 28 The reader may consult Huxley's " Lessons in Elementary Physi- ology," p. 204. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 67 Mr. Wallace " makes an analogous remark with regard to the organ of voice in man — the human larynx. He says of singing : " The habits of savages give no indication of how this faculty could have been developed by Natural Se- lection, because it is never required or used by them. The singing of savages is a more or less monotonous howling, and the females seldom sing at all. Savages certainly never choose their wives for fine voices, but for rude health, and strength, and physical beauty. Sexual selection could not therefore have developed this wonderful power, which only comes into play among civilized people." Reverting once more to beauty of form and color, there is one manifestation of it for which no one can pretend that sexual selection can possibly account. The instance re- ferred to is that presented by bivalve shell-fish.80 Here we meet with charming tints and elegant forms and markings of no direct use to their possessors S1 in the struggle for life, and of no indirect utility as regards sexual selection, for fertilization takes place by the mere action of currents of water, and the least beautiful individual has fully as good a chance of becoming a parent as has the one which is the most favored in beauty of form and color. Again, the peculiar outline and coloration of certain orchids — notably of our own bee, fly, and spider orchids — seem hardly explicable by any action of " Natural Selec- tion." Mr. Darwin says very little on this singular resem- blance of flowers to insects, and what he does say seems hardly to be what an advocate of " Natural Selection " 29 " Natural Selection," p. 350. 30 Bivalve shell-fish are creatures belonging to the oyster, scallop, and cockle group, i. e., to the class Lamellibranchiata. 31 The attempt has been made to explain these facts as owing to " manner and symmetry of growth, and to color being incidental on the chemical nature of the constituents of the shell" But surely beauty depends on some such matters hi all cases ! 68 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. would require. Surely, for minute accidental indefinite va- riations to have built up such a striking resemblance to in- sects, we ought to find that the preservation of the plant, or the perpetuation of . its race, depends almost constantly on relations between bees, spiders, and flies respectively and the bee, spider, and fly orchids.82 This process must have continued for ages constantly and perseveringly, and yet what is the fact ? Mr. Darwin tells us, in his work on the " Fertilization of Orchids," that neither the spider nor the fly orchids are much visited by insects, while, with re- gard to the bee orchid, he says, " I have never seen an in- sect visit these flowers." And he shows how this species is even wonderfully and specially modified to effect self- fertilization. In the work just referred to Mr. Darwin gives a series of the most wonderful and minute contrivances by which the visits of insects are utilized for the fertilization of orchids — structures so wonderful that nothing could well be more so, except the attribution of their origin to minute, fortui- tous, and indefinite variation. The instances are too numerous and too long to quote, but in his " Origin of Species " 33 he describes two which must not be passed over. In one ( Coryanthes) the orchid has its lower lip enlarged into a bucket, above which stand two water-secreting horns. These latter replenish the bucket from which, when half-filled, the water overflows by a spout on one side. Bees visiting the flower fall into the bucket and crawl out at the spout. By the peculiar arrangement of the parts of the flower, the first bee which does so car- 32 It has been suggested in opposition to what is here said, that there is no real resemblance, but that the likeness is "fanciful! " The denial, however, of the fact of a resemblance which has struck so many ob- servers^ reminds one of the French philosopher's estimate of facts hostile to his theory — " Tant pis pour les faits ! " 33 Fifth edition, p. 236. II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 69 ries away the pollen-mass glued to his back, and then when he has his next involuntary bath in another flower, as he crawls out the pollen-mass attached to him comes in con- tact with the stigma of that second flower and fertilizes it. In the other example (Catasetum), when a bee gnaws a certain part of the flower, he inevitably touches a long deli- cate projection, which Mr. Darwin calls the antenna. " This antenna transmits a vibration to a certain membrane, which is instantly ruptured ; this sets free a spring by which the pollen-mass is shot forth like an arrow in the right direc- tion, and adheres by its viscid extremity to the back of the bee!" Another difficulty, and one of some importance, is pre- sented by those communities of ants which have not only a population of sterile females, or workers, but two distinct and very different castes of such. Mr. Darwin believes that he has got over this difficulty by having found individuals intermediate in form and structure 34 between the two work- ing castes ; others may think that we have in this belief of Mr. Darwin, an example of the unconscious action of vo- lition upon credence. A vast number of difficulties similar to those which have been mentioned might easily be cited — those given, however, may suffice. There remains, however, to be noticed a very important consideration, which was brought forward in the North British Review for June, 1867, p. 286, namely, the neces- sity for the simultaneous modification of many individuals. This consideration seems to have escaped Mr. Darwin, for at p. 104 of his last (fifth) edition of " Natural Selection," he admits, with great candor, that until reading this arti- 34 Mr. Smith, of the Entomological department of the British Mi^eum, has kindly informed me that the individuals intermediate in structure are very few in number — not more than five per cent. — compared with the number of distinctly differentiated individuals. Besides, in the Brazilian kinds these intermediate forms are wanting. 70 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. cle he did not " appreciate how rarely single variations, whether slight or strongly marked, could be perpetuated." The North British Review (speaking of the supposition that a species is changed by the survival of a few individu- als in a century through a similar and favorable variation) says : " It is very difficult to see how this can be accom- plished, even when the variation is eminently favorable in- deed ; and still more difficult when the advantage gained is very slight, as must generally be the case. The advantage, whatever it may be, is utterly out-balanced by numerical inferiority. A million creatures are born' ten thousand survive to produce offspring. One of the million has twice as good a -chance as any other of surviving ; but the chances are fifty to one against the gifted individuals being one of the hundred survivors. No doubt the chances are twice as great against any one other individual, but this does not prevent their being enormously in favor of some average in- dividual. However slight the advantage may be, if it is shared by half the individuals produced, it will probably be present in at least fifty-one of the survivors, and in a larger proportion of their offspring ; but the chances are against the preservation oi any one ' sport ' (i. e., sudden, marked variation) in a numerous tribe. The vague use of an im- perfectly-understood doctrine of chance has led Darwinian supporters, first, to confuse the two cases above distin- guished ; and, secondly, to imagine that a very slight bal- ance in favor of some individual sport must lead to its per- petuation. All that can be said is that in the above ex- ample the favored sport would be preserved once in fifty times. Let us consider what will be its influence on the main stock when preserved. It will breed and have a pro- geny of say 100 ; now this progeny will, on the whole, be intermediate between the average individual and the sport. The odds in favor of one of this generation of the new breed will be, say one and a half to one, as compared with the II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 71 average individual; the odds in their favor will, therefore, be less than that of their parents; but owing to their greater number, the chances are that about one and a half of them would survive. Unless these breed together, a most improbable event, their progeny would again approach the average individual ; there would be 150 of them, and their superiority would be, say in the ratio of one in a quarter to one ; the probability would now be that nearly two of them would survive, and have 200 children, with an eighth superiority. Rather more than two of these would survive; but the superiority would again dwindle, until after a few generations it would no longer be observed, and would count for no more in the struggle for life than any of the hundred trifling advantages which occur in the ordi- nary organs. An illustration will bring this conception home. Suppose a white man to have been wrecked on an island inhabited by negroes, and to have established him- self in friendly relations with a powerful tribe, whose cus- toms he has learned. Suppose him to possess the physical strength, energy, and ability of a dominant white race, and let the food and climate of the island suit his constitution ; grant him every advantage which we can conceive a white to possess over the native ; concede that in the struggle for existence his chance of a long life will be much superior to that of the native chiefs ; yet from all these admissions, there does not follow the conclusion that, after a limited or unlimited number of generations, the inhabitants of the isl- and will be white. Our shipwrecked hero would probably become king ; he would kill a great many blacks in the struggle for existence; he would have a great many wives and children." ..." In the first generation there will be some dozens of intelligent young mulattoes, much superior in average intelligence to the negroes. We might expect the throne for some generations to be occupied by a more or less yellow king ; but can any one believe that the whole 72 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. island will gradually acquire a white, or even a yellow, pop- ulation ? " " Darwin says that in the struggle for life a grain may turn the balance in favor of a given structure, which will then be preserved. But one of the weights in the scale of Nature is due to the number of a given tribe. Let there be 7,000 A's and 7,000 B's, representing two varieties of a given an- imal, and let all the B's, in virtue of a slight difference of structure, have the better chance of life by ^-^ part. We must allow that there is a slight probability that the de- scendants of B will supplant the descendants of A; but let there be only 7,001 A's against 7,000 B's at first, and the chances are once more equal, while if there be 7,002 A's to start, the odds would be laid on the A's. True, they stand a greater chance of being killed ; but then they can better afford to be killed. The grain will only turn the scales when these are very nicely balanced, and an advantage in numbers counts for weight, even as an advantage in struct- ure. As the numbers of the favored variety diminish, so must its relative advantages increase, if the chance of its existence is to surpass the chance of its extinction, until hardly any conceivable advantage would enable the de- scendants of a single pair to exterminate the descendants of many thousands if they and their descendants are sup- posed to breed freely with the inferior variety, and so grad- ually lose their ascendency." Mr. Darwin himself says of the article quoted : " The justice of these remarks cannot, I think, be disputed. If, for instance, a bird of some kind could procure its food more easily by having its beak curved, and if one were born with its beak strongly curved, and which consequently flourished, nevertheless there would be a very poor chance of this one individual perpetuating its kind to the exclusion of the com- mon form." This admission seems almost to amount to a change of front in the face of the enemy ! II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 73 These remarks have been quoted at length because they so greatly intensify the difficulties brought forward in this chapter. If the most favorable variations have to contend with such difficulties, what must be thought as to the chance of preservation of the slightly-displaced eye in a sole or of the incipient development of baleen in a whale ? SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION. It has been here contended that a certain few facts, out of many which might have been brought forward, are incon- sistent with the origination of species by " Natural Selec- tion " only or mainly. Mr. Darwin's theory requires minute, indefinite, fortui- tous variations of all parts in all directions, and he insists that the sole operation of " Natural Selection " upon such is sufficient to account for the great majority of organic forms, with their most complicated structures, intricate mutual adaptations, and delicate adjustments. To this conception has been opposed the difficulties presented by such a structure as the form of the giraffe, which ought not to have been the solitary structure it is ; also the minute beginnings and the last refinements of pro- tective mimicry equally difficult or rather impossible to ac- count for by " Natural Selection." Again, the difficulty as to the heads of flat-fishes has been insisted on, as also the origin, and at the same time the constancy, of the limbs of the highest animals. Reference has also been made to the whalebone of whales, and to the impossibility of under- standing its origin through "Natural Selection" only; the same as regards the infant kangaroo, with its singular defi- ciency of power compensated for by maternal structures on the one hand, to which its own breathing-organs bear direct relation on the other. Again, the delicate and complex pedicellarias of Echinoderms, with a certain process of devel- opment (through a secondary larva) found in that class, 4 74 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. together with certain other exceptional modes of develop- ment, have been brought forward. The development of color in certain apes, the hood of the cobra, and the rattle of the rattlesnake, have also been cited. Again, difficulties as to the process of formation of the eye and ear, and as to the fully-developed condition of those complex organs, as well as of the voice, have been considered. The beauty of certain shell-fish ; the wonderful adaptations of structure, and variety of form and resemblance, found in orchids ; together with the complex habits and social conditions of certain ants, have been hastily passed in review. When all these complications are duly weighed and considered, and when it is borne in mind how necessary it is for the permanence of a new variety that many individuals in each case should be simultaneously modified, the cumulative argument seems irresistible. The author of this book can say that, though by no means disposed originally to dissent from the theory of " Natural Selection," if only its difficulties could be solved, he has found each successive year that deeper consideration and more careful examination have more and more brought home to him the inadequacy of Mr. Darwin's theory to ac- count for the preservation and intensification of incipient, specific, and generic characters. That minute, fortuitous, and indefinite variations could have brought about such spe- cial forms and modifications as have been enumerated in this chapter, seems to contradict not imagination, but reason. That either many individuals among a species of butter- fly should be simultaneously preserved through a similar accidental and minute variation in one definite direction, when variations in many other directions would also pre- serve ; or that one or two so varying should succeed in sup- planting the progeny of thousands of other individuals, and that this should by no other cause be carried so far as to produce the appearance (as we have before stated) of spots II.] INCIPIENT STRUCTURES. 75 of fungi, etc. — are alternatives of an improbability so ex- treme as to be practically equal to impossibility. In spite of all the resources of a fertile imagination, the Darwinian, pure and simple, is reduced to the assertion of a paradox as great as any he opposes. In the place of a mere assertion of our ignorance as to the way these phe- nomena have jeen produced, he brings forward, as their explanation, a cause which it is contended in this work is demonstrably insufficient. Of course in this matter, as elsewhere throughout Nature, we have to do with the operation of fixed and constant natural laws, and the knowledge of these may before long be obtained by human patience or human genius ; but there is, it is believed, already enough evidence to show that these as yet unknown natural laws or law will never be resolved into the action of " Natural Selection," but will constitute or exemplify a mode and condition of organic action of which the Darwinian theory takes no account whatsoever. 76 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. CHAPTER IH. THE COEXISTENCE OF CLOSELY-SIMILAR STRUCTURES OF DIVERSE ORIGIN. Chances against Concordant Variations. — Examples of Discordant Ones. — Concordant Variations not unlikely on a non -Darwinian Evolutionary Hypothesis. — Placental and Implacental Mammals.— Birds and Eeptiles.— Independent Origins of Similar Sense Organs.— The Ear.— The Eye.— Other Coincidences.— Causes besides Natural Selection produce Concordant Variations in Certain Geographical Regions.— Causes besides Natural Selection produce Concordant Variations in Certajn Zoological and Botanical Groups.— There are Homologous Parts not genetically related.— Harmony in respect of the Organic and Inorganic Worlds. — Summary and Conclusion. • THE theory of " Natural Selection " supposes that the varied forms and structure of animals and plants have been built up merely by indefinite, fortuitous,1 minute variations in every part and in all directions — those variations only being preserved which are directly or indirectly useful to the individual possessing them, or necessarily correlated with such useful variations. On this theory the chances are almost infinitely great against the independent, accidental occurrence and pres- ervation of two similar series of minute variations result- ing in the independent development of two closely-similar forms. In all cases, no doubt (on this same theory), some adaptation to habit or need would gradually be evolved, but that adaptation would surely be arrived at by different roads. The organic world supplies us with multitudes of 1 By accidental variations Mr. Darwin does not, of course, mean to imply variations really due to " chance," bat to utterly indeterminate antecedents. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 77 examples of similar functional results being attained by the most diverse means. Thus the body is sustained in the air by birds and by bats. In the first case it is so sustained by a limb in which the bones of the hand are excessively reduced, but which is provided with immense outgrowths from the skin — namely, the feathers of the wing. In the second case, however, the body is sustained in the air by a limb in which the bones of the hand are enormously in- WI>*G-BO>*ES OF PTEBODACTYL, BAT, AXD BIRD. (Copied, by permission, from Mr. Andrew Murray's " Geographical Distribution of Mammal*") creased in length, and so sustain a great expanse of naked skin, which is the flying membrane of the bat's wing. Cer- tain fishes and certain reptiles can also flit and take very prolonged jumps in the air. The flying-fish, however, takes these by means of a great elongation of the rays of the pectoral fins — parts which cannot be said to be of the same nature as the constituents of the wing of either the bat or the bird. The little lizard, which enjoys the formi- dable name of " flying-dragon," flits by means of a structure altogether peculiar — namely, by the liberation and great elongation of some of the ribs which support a fold of skin. In the extinct pterodactyls — which were truly flying rep- 78 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. tiles — we meet with an approximation to the structure of the bat, but in the pterodactyl we have only one finger elongated in each hand : a striking example of how the very same function may be provided for by a modification similar in principle, yet surely manifesting the indepen- dence of its origin. When we go to lower animals, we find flight produced by organs, as the wings of insects, which are not even modified limbs at all ; or we find even the SKELETON OF THE FLYING-DRAGON. (Showing the elongated ribs which support the flitting organ.) function sometimes subserved by quite artificial means, as in the aerial spiders, which use their own threads to float with in the air. In the vegetable kingdom the atmosphere is often made use of for the scattering of seeds, by their being furnished with special structures of very different kinds. The diverse modes by which such seeds are dis- persed are well expressed by Mr. Darwin. He says : a 2 " Origin of Species,'1 5th edit., p. 235. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 79 " Seeds are disseminated by their minuteness — by their capsule being converted into a light balloon-like envelope — by being embedded in pulp or flesh, formed of the most diverse parts, and rendered nutritious, as well as conspicu- ously colored, so as to attract and be devoured by birds — by having hooks and grapnels of many kinds and serrated awns, so as to adhere to the fur of quadrupeds — and by be- ing furnished with wings and plumes, as different in shape as elegant in structure, so as to be wafted by every breeze." Again, if we consider the poisoning apparatus pos- sessed by different animals, we find in serpents a perfo- rated— or, rather, very deeply-channelled — tooth. In wasps and bees the sting is formed of modified parts, accessory in reproduction. In the scorpion, we have the median ter- minal process of the body specially organized. In the spider, we have a specially-constructed antenna ; and final- ly in the centipede a pair of modified thoracic limbs. It would be easy to produce a multitude of such in- stances of similar ends being attained by dissimilar means, and it is here contended that by " the action of Natural 80 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Selection " only it is so improbable as to be practically im- possible for two exactly-similar structures to have ever been independently developed. It is so because the num- ber of possible variations is indefinitely great, and it is therefore an indefinitely great number to one against a similar series of variations occurring and being similarly preserved in any two independent instances. The difficulty here asserted applies, however, only to pure Darwinism, which makes use only of indirect modifi- cations through the survival of the fittest. Other theories (for example, that of Mr. Herbert Spen- cer) admit the direct action of conditions upon animals and plants— in ways not yet fully understood — there being con- ceived to be at the same time a certain peculiar but limited power of response and adaptation in each animal and plant so acted on. Such theories have not to contend against the difficulty proposed, and it is here urged that even very complex extremely similar structures have again and again been developed quite independently one of the other, and this because the process has taken place not by merely haphazard, indefinite variations in all directions, but by the concurrence of some other and internal natural law or laws cooperating with external influences and with "Natural Selection " in the evolution of organic forms. It must never be forgotten that to admit any such con- stant operation of any such unknown natural cause is to deny the purely Darwinian theory, which relies upon the survival of the fittest by means of minute fortuitous indefi- nite variations. Among many other obligations which the author has to acknowledge to Prof. Huxley are, the pointing out of this very difficulty, and the calling his attention to the striking resemblance between certain teeth of the dog and of the thylacine as one instance, and certain ornithic pe- culiarities of pterodactyls as another. in.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 81 Mammals8 are divisible into one great group, which comprises the immense majority of kinds termed, from their mode of reproduction, placenta! Mammals, and into another very much smaller group comprising the pouched- beasts or marsupials (which are the kangaroos, bandicoots, phalangers, etc., of Australia), and the true opossums of America, called implacental Mammals. Now, the placen- tal mammals are subdivided into various orders, among which are the flesh-eaters (Carnivora, i. e., cats, dogs, ot- ters, weasels, etc.), and the insect-eaters (Insectivora, i. e., moles, hedgehogs, shrew-mice, etc.). The marsupial mam- mals also present a variety of forms (some of which are carnivorous beasts, while others are insectivorous), so marked that it has been even proposed to divide them into orders parallel to the orders of ^lacental beasts. The resemblance, indeed, is so striking as, on Darwinian principles, to suggest the probability of genetic affinity ; and it even led Prof. Huxley, in his Hunterian Lectures, in 1866, to promulgate the notion that a vast and widely-dif- fused marsupial fauna may have existed anteriorly to the TEETH OP TTBOTBICHU8 AND PERAJ4ELE8 development of the ordinary placenta!, non-pouched beasts, and that the carnivorous, insectivorous, and herbivorous 3 I. e., warm-blooded animals which suckle their young, such as apes, bats, hoofed beasts, lions, dogs, bears, weasels, rats, squirrels, armadillos, sloths, whales, porpoises, kangaroos, opossums, etc. 82 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. placentals may have respectively descended from the car- nivorous, insectivorous, and herbivorous marsupials. Among other points Prof. Huxley called attention to the resemblance between the anterior molars of the placen- tal dog with those of the marsupial thylacine. These, in- deed, are strikingly similar, but there are better examples still of this sort of coincidence. Thus it has often been re- marked that the insectivorous marsupials, e. g., Perameles, wonderfully correspond, as to the form of certain of the grinding teeth, with certain insectivorous placentals, e. g., Urotrichus. Again, the saltatory insectivores of Africa (Macrosce- lides) not only resemble the kangaroo family (Macropodidce) in their jumping habits and long hind-legs, but also in the structure of their molar teeth, and even further, as I have elsewhere * pointed out, in a certain similarity of the upper cutting teeth, or incisors. Now, these correspondences are the more striking when we bear in mind that a similar dentition is often put to very different uses. The food of different kinds of apes is very different, yet how uniform is their dental structure ! Again, who, looking at the teeth of different kinds of bears, would ever suspect that one kind was frugivorous, and another a devourer exclusively of animal food ? The suggestion made by Prof. Huxley was therefore one which had much to recommend it to Darwinians, though it has not met with any notable acceptance, and though he seems himself to have returned to the older no- tion, namely, that the pouched-beasts, or marsupials, are a special ancient offshoot from the great mammalian class. But, whichever view may be the correct one, we have in either case a number of forms similarly modified in har- mony with surrounding conditions, and eloquently proclaim- ing some natural plastic power, other than mere fortuitous 4 " Journal of Anatomy and Physiology " (1868), vol. ii., p. 139. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 83 variation with survival of the fittest. If, however, the reader thinks that teeth are parts peculiarly qualified for rapid variation (in which view the author cannot concur), he is requested to suspend his judgment till he has con- sidered the question of the independent evolution of the highest organs of sense. If this seems to establish the existence of some other law than that of " Natural Selec- tion," then the operation of that other law may surely be also traced in the harmonious coordinations of dental form. The other difficulty, kindly suggested to me by the learned professor, refers to the structure of birds, and of extinct reptiles more or less related to them. The class of birds is one which is remarkably uniform in its organization. So much is this the case, that the best mode of subdividing the class is a problem of the greatest difficulty. Existing birds, however, present forms which, though closely resembling in the greater part of their struct- ure, yet differ importantly the one from the other. One form is exemplified by the ostrich, rhea, emeu, cassowary, apteryx, dinornis, etc. These are the struthious birds. All other existing birds belong to the second division, and are called (from the keel on the breast-bone) carinate birds. Now, birds and reptiles have such and so many points in common that Darwinians must regard the former as modified descendants of ancient reptilian forms. But on Darwinian principles it is impossible that the class of birds so uniform and homogeneous should have had a double rep- tilian origin. If one set of birds sprang from one set of rep- tiles, and another set of birds from another set of reptiles, the two sets could never, by " Natural Selection " only, have grown into such a perfect similarity. To admit such a phenomenon would be equivalent to abandoning the theory of " Natural Selection " as the sole origin of species. Now, until recently it has generally been supposed by 84 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. evolutionists that those ancient flying reptiles, the ptero- dactyls, or forms allied to them, were the progenitors of the class of birds ; and certain parts of their structure espe- cially support this view. Allusion is here made to the blade-bone (scapula) and the bone which passes down from the shoulder-joint to the breast-bone (viz., the coracoid). These bones are such remarkable anticipations of the same parts in ordinary (i. e., carinate) birds that it is hardly pos- sible for a Darwinian not to regard the resemblance as due to community of origin. This resemblance was carefully pointed out by Prof. Huxley in his " Hunterian Course " for 1867, when attention was called to the existence in Di- morphodon macronyx of even that small process which in birds gives attachment to the upper end of the merry- thought. Also Mr. Seeley 6 has shown that in pterodac- tyls, as in birds, the optic lobes of the brain were placed low down on each side — " lateral and depressed." Never- theless, the view has been put forward and ably maintained by the same professor,8 as also by Prof. Cope in the United States, that the line of descent from reptiles to birds has not been from ordinary reptiles, through pterodactyl-like forms, to ordinary birds, but to the struthious ones from certain extinct reptiles termed Dinosauria ; one of the most familiarly known of which is the Iguanodon of the Weal- den formation. In these Dinosauria we find skeletal char- acters unlike those of ordinary (i. e., carinate) birds, but closely resembling in certain points the osseous structure of the struthious birds. Thus a difficulty presents itself as to the explanation of the three following relationships : (1) That of the Pterodactyls with carinate birds ; (2) that 6 See "Ann. and Mag. of Nat. Hist." for August, 1870, p. 140. 6 See " Proceedings of the Royal Institution," vol. v., part iv,, p. 278 : Report of a Lecture delivered February 7, 1868. Also " Quarterly Jour- nal of the Geological Society," February, 1870. "Contributions to the Anatomy and Taxonomy of the Dinosauria." HI.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 85 of the Dinosauria with strut hious birds ; (3) that of the carinate and struthious birds with each other. Either birds must have had two distinct origins whence they grew to their present conformity, or the very same skeletal, and probably cerebral characters, must have spon- taneously and independently arisen. Here is a dilemma, either horn of which bears a threatening aspec*t to the exclusive supporter of " Natural Selection," and between which it seems somewhat difficult to choose. It has been suggested to me that this difficulty may be evaded by considering pterodactyls and carinate birds as independent branches from one side of an ancient common trunk, while similarly the Dinosauria and struthious birds are taken to be independent branches from the other side of the same common trunk ; the two kinds of birds resem- bling each other so much on account of their later develop- ment from that trunk as compared with the development of the reptilian forms. But to this it may be replied that the ancient common stock could not have had at one and the same time a shoulder structure of both kinds. It must have been that of the struthious birds or that of the cari- nate birds, or something different from both. If it was that of the struthious birds, how did the pterodactyls and cari- nate birds independently arrive at the very same divergent structure ? If it was that of the carinate birds, how did the struthious birds and Dinosauria independently agree to differ ? Finally, if it was something different from either, how did the carinate birds and pterodactyls take on inde- pendently one special common structure when disagreeing in so many ; while the struthious birds, agreeing in many points with the Dinosauria, agree yet more with the cari- nate birds ? Indeed, by no arrangement of branches from a stem can the difficulty be evaded. Prof. Huxley seems inclined 7 to cut the Gordian knot 1 " Proceedings of Geological Society," November, 1869, p. 38. 86 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. • by considering the shoulder structure of the pterodactyl as independently educed, and having relation to physiology only. This conception is one which harmonizes completely with the views here advocated, and with those of Mr. Her- bert Spencer, who also calls in direct modification to the aid of " Natural Selection." That merely minute, indefinite variations in all directions should unaided have indepen- dently built up the shoulder structure of the pterodactyls and carinate birds, and have laterally depressed their optic lobes, at a time so far back as the deposition of the Oolite THE AECHEOPTEETX (of the Oolite strata). strata,8 is a coincidence of the highest improbability ; but that an innate power and evolutionary law, aided by the corrective action of " Natural Selection," should have fur- nished like needs with like aids, is not at all improbable. The difficulty does not tell against the theory of evolution, but only against the specially Darwinian form of it. Now, this form has never been expressly adopted by Prof. Huxley; 8 The archeopteryx of the oolite has the true carinate shoulder struct- ure. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 87 so far from it, in his lecture on this subject at the Royal Institution before referred to, he observes : * " I can testify, from personal experience, it is possible to have a complete faith in the general doctrine of evolution, and yet to hesi- tate in accepting the Nebular, or the Uniformitarian, or the Darwinian hypotheses in all their integrity and ful- ness." f It is quite consistent, then, in the professor to explain the difficulty as he does ; but it would not be similarly so with an absolute and pure Darwinian. Yet stronger arguments of an analogous kind are, how- ever, to be derived from the highest organs of sense. In the most perfectly-organized animals — those, namely, which, like ourselves, possess a spinal column — the internal organs of hearing consist of two more or less complex membranous sacs (containing calcareous, particles — otoliths), which are primitively or permanently lodged in two chambers, one on each side of the cartilaginous skull. The primitive cartila- ginous cranium supports and protects the base of the brain, and the auditory nerves pass from the brain into the cartila- ginous chambers to reach the auditory sacs. These com- plex arrangements of parts could not have been evolved by "Natural Selection," i. e., by. minute accidental variations, except by the action of such through a vast period of time ; nevertheless, it was fully evolved at the time of the deposi- tion of the upper Silurian rocks. Cuttle-fishes ( Cephalopoda) are animals belonging to the molluscous primary division of the animal kingdom, which division contains animals formed upon a type of structure utterly remote from that on which the animals of the higher division provided with a spinal column are construct- ed. And indeed no transitional form (tending even to bridge over the chasm between these two groups) has ever 9 " Proceedings of the Royal Institution," roL v., p. 279. 88 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. yet been discovered, either living or in a fossilized condi- tion.10 Nevertheless, in the two-gilled Cephalopods (Dibran- chiata) we find the brain supported and protected by a car- tilaginous cranium. In the base of this cranium are two cartilaginous chambers. In each chamber is a membranous sac containing an otolith, and the auditory nerves pass from CUTTLE-FISH. A. Ventral aspect. B. Dorsal aspect. the cerebral ganglia into the cartilaginous chambers to reach the auditory sacs. Moreover, it has been suggested by Prof. Owen that sinuosities between processes projecting from the inner wall of each chamber " seem to be the first rudiments of those which, in the higher classes (i. e., in animals with a spinal column), are extended in the form of 10 This remark is made without prejudice to possible affinities in the direction of the Ascidians — an affinity which, if real, would be irrelevant to the question here discussed. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 89 canals and spiral chambers, within the substance of the dense nidus of the labyrinth." " Here, then, we have a wonderful coincidence indeed ; two highly-complex auditory organs, marvellously similar in structure, but which must nevertheless have been devel- oped in entire and complete independence one of the other ! It would be difficult to calculate the odds against the independent occurrence and conservation of two such complex series of merely accidental and minute haphazard variations. And it can never be maintained that the sense of hearing could not be efficiently subserved otherwise than by such sacs, in cranial cartilaginous capsules so situ- ated in relation to the brain, etc. Our wonder, moreover, may be increased when we recollect that the two-gilled cephalopods have not yet been found below the lias, where they at once abound ; whereas the four-gilled cephalopods are Silurian forms. Moreover, the absence is in this case significant in spite of the imper- fection of the geological record, because when we consider how many individuals of various kinds of four-gilled cephal- opods have been found, it is fair to infer that at the least a certain small percentage of dibranchs would also have left traces of their presence had they existed. Thus it is probable that some four-gilled form was the progenitor of the dibranch cephalopods. Now, the four-gilled kinds (judging from the only existing form, the nautilus) had the auditory organ in a very inferior condition of development to what we find in the dibranch ; thus we have not only evidence of the independent high development of the organ in the former, but also evidence pointing toward a certain degree of comparative rapidity in its development. Such being the case with regard to the organ of hear- ing, we have another yet stronger argument with regard to 11 " Lectures on the Comp. Anat. of the Invertebrate Animals," 2d edit, 1855, p. 619 ; and Todd's " Cyclopaedia of Anatomy," vol. i., p. 554 90 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. the organ of sight, as has been well pointed out by Mr. J. J. Murphy.12 He calls attention to the fact that the eye must have been perfected in at least " three distinct lines of descent," alluding not only to the molluscous division of the animal kingdom, and the division provided with a spinal column, but also to a third primary division, namely, that which includes all insects, spiders, crabs, etc., which are spoken of as Annulosa, and the type of whose structure is as distinct from that of the molluscous type on the one hand, as it is from that of the type with a spinal column (i. e., the vertebrate type) on the other. In the cuttle-fishes we find an eye even more complete- ly constructed on the vertebrate type than is the ear. Sclerotic, retina, choroid, vitreous humor, lens, aqueous hu- mor, all are present. The correspondence is wonderfully complete, and there can hardly be any hesitation in saying that for such an exact, prolonged, and correlated series of similar structures to have been brought about in two inde- pendent instances by merely indefinite and minute acci- dental variations, is an improbability which amounts' prac- tically to impossibility. Moreover, we have here again the same imperfection of the four-gilled cephalopod, as com- pared with the two-gilled, and therefore (if the latter pro- ceeded from the former) a similar indication of a certain comparative rapidity of development. Finally, and this is perhaps one of the most curious circumstances, the process of formation appears to have been, at least in some re- spects, the same in the eyes of these molluscous animals as in the eyes of vertebrates. For in these latter the cornea is at first perforated, while different degrees of perforation of the same part are presented by different adult cuttle- fishes— large in the calamaries, smaller in the octopods, and reduced to a minute foramen in the true cuttle-fish sepia. 12 See "Habit and Intelligence," vol. i., p. 321. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 91 Some may be disposed to object that the conditions requisite for effecting vision are so rigid that similar results in all cases must be independently arrived at. But to this objection it may well be replied that Nature herself has demonstrated that there is no such necessity as to the de- tails of the process. For in the higher Annulosa, such as the dragon-fly, we meet with an eye of an unquestionably very high degree of efficiency, but formed on a type of structure only remotely comparable with that of the fish or the cephalopod. The last-named animal might have had an eye as efficient as that of a vertebrate, but formed on a distinct type, instead of being another edition, as it were, of the very same structure. In the beginning of this chapter examples have been given of the very diverse mode in which similar results have in many instances been arrived at ; on the other hand, we have in the fish and the cephalopod not only the eye, but at one and the same time the ear also similarly evolved, yet with complete independence. Thus it is here contended that the similar and complex structures of both the highest organs of sense, as developed in the vertebrates on the one hand, and in the mollusks on the other, present us with residuary phenomena for which " Natural Selection " alone is quite incompetent to account ; and that these same phenomena must therefore be consid- ered as conclusive evidence for the action of some other natural law or laws conditioning the simultaneous and in- dependent evolution of these harmonious and concordant adaptations. Provided with this evidence, it may be now profitable to enumerate other correspondences, which are not perhaps in themselves inexplicable by Natural Selection, but which are more readily to be explained by the action of the un- Known law or laws referred to — which action, as its neces- sity has been demonstrated in one case, becomes a priori probable in the others. 92 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Thus the great oceanic Mammalia — the whales — show striking resemblances to those prodigious, extinct, marine SKELETON OF AN ICUTHYOSAUEU8. reptiles, the Ichthyosauria, and this not only in structures readily referable to similarity of habit, but in such matters as greatly elongated premaxillary bones, together with the concealment of certain bones of the skull by other cranial bones. Again, the aerial mammals, the bats, resemble those fly- ing reptiles of the secondary epoch, the pterodactyls; not only to a certain extent in the breast-bone and mode of sup- porting the flying membrane, but also in the proportions of different parts of the spinal column and the hinder (pelvic) limbs Also bivalve shell-fish (i. e., creatures of the muscle, cockle, and oyster class, which receive their name from the body being protected by a double shell, one valve of which is placed on each side) have their two shells united by one or two powerful muscles, which pass directly across from one shell to the other, and which are termed " adductor muscles " because by their contraction they bring together the valves and so close the shell. Now there are certain animals which belong to the crab and lobster class (Crustacea) — a class constructed on an utterly different type from that on which the bivalve shell- fish are constructed — which present a very curious approxi- mation to both the form and, in a certain respect, the structure of true bivalves. Allusion is here made to certain III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 93 small Crustacea — certain phyllopods and ostracods — which have the hard outer coat of their thorax so modified as to look wonderfully like a bivalve shell, although its nature and composition are quite different. But this is by no means all — not only is there this external resemblance )EA TOKOSA. [An ostracod (Crustacean), externally like a bivalve shell-fish (Lamelh'branch).] between the thoracic armor of the crustacean and the bivalve shell, but the two sides of the ostracod and phyllo- pod thorax are connected together also by an adductor muscle ! The pedicellariae of the echinus have been already spo- ken of, and the difficulty as to their origin from minute, fortuitous, indefinite variations has been stated. But structures essentially similar (called avicularia, or " bird's- head processes") are developed from the surface of the compound masses of certain of the highest of the polyp- like animals (viz., the Polyzoa or, as they are sometimes called, the Bryozoa). These compound animals have scattered over the surface of their bodies minute processes, each of which is like the 94 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. head of a bird, with an upper and lower beak, the whole supported on a slender neck. The beak opens and shuts at intervals, like the jaws of the pedicellarise of the echi- nus, and there is altogether, in general principle, a remark. A POLYZOON WITH BIRD'S-HEAD PROCESSES. able similarity between the structures. Yet the echinus can have, at the best, none but the most distant genetic relationship with the Polyzoa. We have here again, III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 95 therefore, complex and similar organs of diverse and inde- pendent origin. BIKD'S-HEAD PROCESSES VERY GEEATLY ENLARGED. In the highest class of animals (the Mammalia) we have almost always a placental mode of reproduction, i. e., the blood of the foetus is placed in nutritive relation with the blood of the mother by means of vascular prominences. No trace of such a structure exists in any bird or in any reptile, and yet it crops out again in certain sharks. There indeed it might well be supposed to end, but, marvellous as it seems, it reappears in very lowly creatures ; namely, in certain of the ascidians, sometimes called tunicaries or sea-squirts. Now, if we were to concede that the ascidians were the common ancestors 1S of both these sharks and of the higher mammals, we should be little, if any, nearer to an explana- tion of the phenomenon by means of " Natural Selection," for in the sharks in question the vascular prominences are developed from one fcetal structure (the umbilical vesicle), while in the the higher mammals they are developed from quite another part, viz., the allantois. So great, however, is the number of similar, but ap- parently independent structures, that we suffer from a per- fect embarras de richesses. Thus, for example, we have the convoluted windpipe of the sloth, reminding us of the condition of the windpipe in birds ; and in another mammal, 13 A view recently propounded by Kowalewsky. 96 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. allied to the sloth, namely, the great ant-eater (Myrme- cophaga), we have again an ornithic character in its horny gizzard -like stomach. In man and the highest apes the cascum has a vermiform appendix, as it has also in the wombat ! Upper Figure — ANTECHINTJS MINTTTISSIMIJS (implacental). Lower Figure— Mus DELICATULUS (placentat). Also the similar forms presented by the crowns of the teeth in some seals, in certain sharks, and in some extinct Cetacea, may be referred to ; as also the similarity of the beak in birds, some reptiles, in the tadpole, and cuttle- fishes. As to entire external form, may be adduced the wonderful similarity between a true mouse (Mus ddicatu- lus) and a small marsupial, pointed out by Mr. Andrew III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 97 Murray in his work on the " Geographical Distributions of Mammals," p. 53, and represented in the frontispiece by figures copied from Gould's " Mammals of Australia ; " but instances enough for the present purpose have been already quoted. Additional reasons for believing that similarity of struct- ure is produced by other causes than merely by " Natural Selection" are furnished by certain facts of zoological geography, and by a similarity in the mode of variation being sometimes extended to several species of a genus, or even to widely-different groups ; while the restriction and the limitation of such similarity are often not less remarkable. Thus Mr. Wallace says,14 as to local influence : " Larger or smaller districts, or even single islands, give a special character to the majority of their Papilionidae. For in- stance: 1. The species of the Indian region (Sumatra, Java, and Borneo) are almost invariably smaller than the allied species inhabiting Celebes and the Moluccas. 2. The species of New Guinea and Australia are also, though in a less degree, smaller than the nearest species or varieties of the Moluccas. 3. In the Moluccas themselves the species of Amboyna are the largest. 4. The species of Celebes equal or even surpass in size those of Amboyna. 5. The species and varieties of Celebes possess a striking charac- ter in the form of the anterior wings, different from that of the allied species and varieties of all the surrounding islands. 6. Tailed species in India or the Indian region be- come tailless as they spread eastward through the Archi- pelago. 7. In Amboyna and Ceram the females of several species are dull-colored, while in the adjacent islands they are more brilliant." Again : 15 "In Amboyna and Ceram the female of the large and handsome Ornithoptera Selena has a large patch on the hind- wings constantly of a pale dull ochre or buff color; while in the scarcely distinguish- 14 " Natural Selection," p. 167. 15 Ibid., p. 173. 5 98 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. able varieties from the adjacent islands, of Bouru and New Guinea, it is of a golden yellow, hardly inferior in brilliancy to its color in the male sex. The female of Omithoptera Priamus (inhabiting Amboyna and Ceram exclusively) is of a pale dusk^-brown tint, while in all the allied species the same sex is nearly black, with contracted white mark- ings. As a third example, the female of Papilio Ulysses has the blue color obscured by dull and dusky tints, while in the closely-allied species from the surrounding islands, the faemles are of almost as brilliant an azure blue as the males. A parallel case to this is the occurrence, in the small islands of Goram, Matabello, K6, and Aru, of several distinct species of Euploea and Diadema, having broad bands or patches of white, which do not exist in any of the allied species from the larger islands. These facts seem to indicate some local influence in modifying color, as unintelligible and almost as remarkable as that which has resulted in the modifications of form previously de- scribed." After endeavoring to explain some of the facts in a way to be noticed directly, Mr. Wallace adds : " " But even the conjectural explanation now given fails us in the other cases of local modification. Why the species of the Western Islands should be smaller than those farther east; why those of Amboyna should exceed in size those of Gilolo and New Guinea ; why the tailed species of India should begin to lose that appendage in the islands, and retain no trace of it on the borders of the Pacific ; and why, in three separate cases, the females of Amboyna species should be less gayly attired than the corresponding females of the sur- rounding islands, are questions which we cannot at present attempt to answer. That they depend, however, on some general principle is certain, because analogous facts have been observed in other parts of the world. Mr. Bates in- 16 "Natural Selection," p. 177. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 99 forms me that, in three distinct groups, Papilios, which, on the Upper Amazon, and in most other parts of South America, have spotless upper wings, obtain pale or white spots at Para and on the Lower Amazon, and also that the ^Eneas group of Papilios never have tails in the equatorial regions and the Amazon valley, but gradually acquire tails in many cases as they range toward the northern or southern tropic. Even in Europe we have somewhat similar facts, for the species and varieties of butterflies peculiar to the Island of Sardinia are generally smaller and more deeply colored than those of the main-land, and the same has been recently shown to be the case with the common tortoise- shell butterfly in the Isle of Man ; while Papilio Hospiton, peculiar to the former island, has lost the tail, which is a prominent feature of the closely-allied P. Machaon. " Facts of a similar nature to those now brought for- ward would no doubt be found to occur in other groups of insects, were local faunas carefully studied in relation to those of the surrounding countries ; and they seem to indi- cate that climate and other physical causes have, in some cases, a very powerful effect in modifying specific form and color, and thus directly aid in producing the endless variety of nature." With regard to butterflies of Celebes belonging to dif- ferent families, they present " a peculiarity of outline which distinguishes them at a glance from those of any other part of the world : " IT it is that the upper wings are generally more elongated and the anterior margin more curved. Moreover, there is, in most instances, near the base, an abrupt bend or elbow, which in some species is very con- spicuous. Mr. Wallace endeavors to explain this phenome- non by the supposed presence at some time of special per- secutors of the modified forms, supporting the opinion by the remark that small, obscure, very rapidly flying and mim- 17 " Malay Archipelago," vol. i., p. 439. 100 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. icked kinds have not had the wing modified. Such an ene- my occasioning increased powers of flight, or rapidity in OUTLINES OP WINGS OP BUTTERFLIES OF CELEBES COMPARED WITH THOSE OF ALLIED Outer outline, Papilio ffigon, of Celebes. Inner outline, P. demoUon, of Singapore and Java.— 2. Outer outline, P. miletus, of Celebes. Inner outline, P. India. — 3. Outer outline, Tachyris sarinda, Celebes. Inner outline, T. nero. turning, he adds, " one would naturally suppose to be an insectivorous bird ; but it is a remarkable fact that most of the genera of fly-catchers of Borneo and Java on the one III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. ]01 side, and of the Moluccas on the other, are almost entirely absent from Celebes. Their place seems to be supplied by the caterpillar-catchers, of which six or seven species are known from Celebes, and are very numerous in individuals. We have no positive evidence that these birds pursue but- terflies on the wing, but it is highly probable that they do so when other food is scarce. Mr. Bates suggested to me that the larger dragon-flies prey upon butterflies, but I did not notice that they were more abundant in Celebes than elsewhere." 18 Now, every opinion or conjecture of Mr. Wallace is worthy of respectful and attentive consideration, but the explanation suggested and before referred to hardly seems a satisfactory one. What the past fauna of Celebes may have been is as yet conjectural. Mr. Wallace tells us that now there is a remarkable scarcity of fly-catchers, and that their place is supplied by birds of which it can only be said that it is "highly probable" that they chase butterflies " when other food is scarce." The quick eye of Mr. Wal- lace failed to detect them in the act, as also to note any unusual abundance of other insectivorous forms, which therefore, considering Mr. Wallace's zeal and powers of observation, we may conclude do not exist. Moreover, even if there ever has been an abundance of such, it is by no means certain that they would have succeeded in pro- ducing the conformation in question, for the effect of this peculiar curvature on flight is by no means clear. We have here, then, a structure hypothetically explained by an un- certain property induced by a cause the presence of which is only conjectural. Surely it is not unreasonable to class this instance with the others before given, in which a common modification of form or color coexists with a certain geographical distribu- tion quite independently of the destructive agencies of ani- 18 " Natural Selection," p. 177. 102 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. mals. If physical causes connected with locality can abbre- viate or annihilate the tails of certain butterflies, why may not similar causes produce an elbow-like prominence on the wings of other butterflies ? There are many such instances of simultaneous modification. Mr. Darwin himself 19 quotes Mr. Gould as believing that birds of the same species are more brightly colored under a clear atmosphere, than when living on islands or near the coast. Mr. Darwin also in- forms us that Wollaston is convinced that residence near the sea affects the color of insects ; and finally, that Moquin- Tandon gives a list of plants which, when growing near the sea-shore, have their leaves in some degree fleshy, though not so elsewhere. In his work on " Animals and Plants under Domestication,"20 Mr. Darwin refers to M. Costa as having (in Bull, de la Soc. Imp. cVAcclimat., tome viii., p. 351) stated that " young shells taken from the shores of England and placed in the Mediterranean at once altered their manner of growth, and formed prominent diverging rays like those on the shells of the proper Mediterranean oyster ; " also to Mr. Meehan, as stating (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sc. of Philadelphia, Jan. 28, 1862) that "twenty-nine kinds of American trees all differ from their nearest European allies in a similar manner, leaves less toothed, buds and seeds smaller, fewer branchlets," etc. These are striking examples indeed ! But cases of simultaneous and similar modifications abound on all sides. Even as regards our own species there is a very generally admitted opinion that a new type has been developed in the United States, and this in about a couple of centuries only, and in a vast multitude of in- dividuals of diverse ancestry. The instances here given, however, must suffice, though more could easily be added. It may be well now to turn to groups presenting similar variations, not through, but independently of, geographical 19- " Origin of Species," 5th edit., p. 166. 20 Vol. ii., p. 280. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 1Q3 distribution, and, as far as we know, independently of con- ditions other than some peculiar nature and tendency (as yet unexplained) common to members of such groups, which nature and tendency seem to induce them to vary in certain definite lines or directions which are different in THE GREAT SHIELDED GBASSHOPPEE. different groups. Thus with regard to the group of in- sects, of which the walking leaf is a member, Mr. Wallace observes:21 "The whole family™ of the Phasmidae, or spectres, to which this insect belongs, is more or less imi- tative, and a great number -of the species are called ' walk- ing-stick insects,' from their singular resemblance to twigs and branches." Again, Mr. Wallace 23 tells us of no less than four kinds 21 See " Natural Selection," p. 64. 22 The Italics are not Mr. Wallace's. 23 " Malay Archipelago," vol. ii., p. 1 50 ; and " Natural Selection," p. 104. 104 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. of orioles, which birds mimic, more or less, four species of a genus of honey-suckers, the weak orioles finding their profit in being mistaken by certain birds of prey for the strong, active, and gregarious honey-suckers. Now, many other birds would be benefited by similar mimicry, which is none the less confined, in this part of the world, to the oriole genus. It is true that the absence of mimicry in other forms may be explained by their possessing some other (as THE SIX-SHAFTED BIED OF PARADISE. yet unobserved) means of preservation. But it is neverthe- less remarkable, not so much that one species should mimic, as that no less than four should do so in different ways and degrees, all these four belonging to one and the same genus. In other cases, however, there is not even the help of protective action to account for the phenomenon. Thus we have the wonderful birds of Paradise,24 which agree in de- 24 See " Malay Archipelago," vol. ii., chap, xxxviii. III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 105 veloping plumage unequalled in beauty, but a beauty which, as to details, is of different kinds, and produced in different ways in different species. To develop " beauty and singularity of plumage " is a character of the group, but not of any one definite kind, to be explained merely by inheritance. Again, we have the very curious horned flies,25 which THE LONG-TAILED BIED OF PABADISE. agree indeed in a common peculiarity, but in one singularly different in detail, in different species, and not known to have any protecting effect. Among plants, also, we meet with the same peculiarity. The great group of Orchids presents a number of species 25 Loc. cit., p. 314. 106 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. .... -'i-^S^^ '- •.•-•- •':• ---<3-,, THE RED BIRD OF PAEADISE. which offer strange and bizarre approx- imations to differ- ent animal forms, and which have .often the appear- ance of cases of mimicry, as it were in an incipient stage. The number of similar instances which could be brought forward from among ani- mals and plants is very great but the examples given are, III.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 107 it is hoped, amply sufficient to point toward the conclusion which other facts will, it is thought, establish, viz., that HOBXED FLIES. there are causes operating (in the evocation of these har- monious diverging resemblances) other than "Natural Se- -. -^*. •- TIIC MAGNIFICENT BIRD OF PARADISE. lection," or heredity, and other even than merely geograph- ical, climatal, or any simply external conditions. 108 TI1E GENESIS OF SrECIES. [CHAP. Many cases have been adduced of striking likenesses between different animals, not due to inheritance ; but this should be the less surprising, in that the very same indi- vidual presents us with likenesses between different parts of its body (e. g., between the several joints of the back- bone), which are certainly not so explicable. This, how- ever, leads to a rather large subject, which will be spoken of in the eighth chapter of the present work. Here it will be enough to affirm (leaving the proof of the assertion till later) that parts are often homologous which have no di- u»ct genetic relationship — a fact which harmonizes well vv ith the other facts here given, but which " Natural Se- lection," pure and simple, seems unable to explain. But surely the independent appearance of similar or- ganic forms is what we might expect, a priori, from the independent appearance of similar inorganic ones. As Mr. G. H. Lewes well observes : ™ tl We do not suppose the car- bpnates and phosphates found in various parts of the globe — we do not suppose that the families of alkaloids and salts have any nearer kinship than that which consists in the similarity of their elements, and the conditions of their combination. Hence, in organisms, as in salts, morpho- logical identity may be due to a community of casual con- nection, rather than community of descent. " Mr. Darwin justly holds it to be incredible that indi- viduals identically the same should have been produced through Natural Selection from parents specifically dis- tinct, but he will not deny that identical forms may issue from parents genetically distinct, when these parent forms and the conditions of production are identical. To deny this would be to deny the law of causation." Prof. Huxley has, however, suggested 27 that such min- eral identity may be explained by applying also to minerals 36 Fortnightly Review, New Series, vol. iii. (April, 1868), p. 372. 27 " Lay Sermons," p. 339, UI.] INDEPENDENT SIMILARITIES OF STRUCTURE. 109 a law of descent ; that is, by considering such similar forms as the descendants of atoms which inhabited one special part of the primitive nebular cosmos, each considerable space of which may be supposed to have been under the influence of somewhat different conditions. Surely, however, there can be no real parity between the relationship of existing minerals to nebular atoms, and the relationship of existing animals and plants to the ear- liest organisms. In the first place, the latter have pro- duced others by generative multiplication, which mineral atoms never did. In the second, existing animals and plants spring from the living tissues of preceding animals and plants, while existing minerals spring from the chemi- cal affinity of separate elements. Carbonate of soda is not formed, by a process of reproduction, fron other carbonate of soda, but directly by the suitable juxtaposition of car- bon, oxygen, and sodium. Instead of approximating animals and minerals in the mode suggested, it may be that they are to be approx- imated in quite a contrary fashion ; namely, by attributing to mineral species an internal innate power. For, as we must attribute to each elementary atom an innate power and tendency to form (under the requisite external con- ditions) certain unions with other atoms, so we may at- tribute to certain mineral species — as crystals — an innate power and tendency to exhibit (the proper conditions being supplied) a definite and symmetrical external form. The distinction between animals and vegetables on the one hand, and minerals on the other, is that, while in the or- ganic world close similarity is the result sometimes of in- heritance, sometimes of direct production independently of parental action, in the inorganic world the latter is the constant and only mode in which such similarity is pro- duced. When we come to consider the relations of species to [10 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. space — in other words, the geographical distribution of organisms — it will be necessary to return somewhat to the subject of the independent origin of closely-similar forms, in regard to which some additional remarks will be found toward the end of the" seventh chapter. In this third chapter an effort has been made to show that while on the Darwinian theory concordant variations are extremely improbable, yet Nature presents us with abundant examples of such ; the most striking of which are, perhaps, the higher organs of sense. Also that an im- portant influence is exercised by conditions connected with geographical distribution, but that a deeper-seated influence is at work, which is hinted at by those special tendencies in definite directions, which are the properties of certain groups. Finally, that these facts, when taken together, afford strong evidence that " Natural Selection " has not been the exclusive or predominant cause of the various or- ganic structural peculiarities. This conclusion has also been reenforced by the consideration of phenomena pre- sented to us by the inorganic world. IV.] MINUTE MODIFICATIONS. HI CHAPTER IV. MINUTE AND GRADUAL MODIFICATIONS. There are Difficulties as to Minute Modifications, even if not fortuitous.— Examples of Sudden and Considerable Modifications of Different Kinds.— Prof. Owen's View.— Mr. Wallace. — Prof. Huxley. — Objections to Sudden Changes. — Labyrinthodont — Potto.— Cetacea.— As to Origin of Bird's Wing.— Tendrils of Climbing Plants.— Animals once supposed to be Connecting Links.— Early Specialization of Structure. — Macrauchenia.— Olyptodon.— Sabre-toothed Tiger.— Conclusion. NOT only are there good reasons against the acceptance of the exclusive operation of " Natural Selection " as the one means of specific origination, but there are difficulties in the way of accounting for such origination by the sole action of modifications which are infinitesimal and minute, whether fortuitous or not. Arguments may yet be advanced in favor of the view that new species have from time to time manifested them- selves with suddenness, and by modifications appearing at once (as great in degree as are those which separate Hip- parion from Equus), the species remaining stable in the intervals of such modifications : by stable being meant that their variations only extend for a certain degree in various directions, like oscillations in a stable equilibrium. This is the conception of Mr. Galton,1 who compares the devel- opment of species with a many-facetted spheroid tumbling over from one facet, or stable equilibrium, to another. The existence of internal conditions in animals corresponding 1 " Hereditary Genius, an Inquiry into its Laws," etc. By Francis Galton, F. R. S. (London: Macmillan.) 112 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. with such facets is denied by pure Darwinians, but it is contended in this work, though not in this chapter, that something may also be said for their existence. The considerations brought forward in the last two chapters, namely, the difficulties with regard to incipient and closely-similar structures respectively, together with paleontological considerations to be noticed later, appear to point strongly in the direction of sudden and consider- able changes. This is notably the case as regards the young oysters already mentioned, which were taken from the shores of England and placed in the Mediterranean, and at once altered their mode of growth and formed prominent diverging rays, like those of the proper Mediter- ranean oyster; as also the twenty-nine kinds of American trees, all differing from their nearest European allies simi- larly— " leaves less toothed, buds and seeds smaller, fewer branchlets," etc. To these may be added other facts given by Mr. Darwin. Thus he says, that " climate, to a certain extent, directly modifies the form of dogs." a The Rev. R. Everett found that setters at Delhi, though most carefully paired, yet had young with " nostrils more contracted, noses more pointed, size inferior, and limbs more slender." Again, cats at Mombas, on the coast of Africa, have short, stiff hairs, instead of fur ; and a cat at Algoa Bay, when left only eight weeks at Mombas, " un- derwent a complete metamorphosis, having parted with its sandj^-colored fur." * The conditions of life seem to pro- duce a considerable effect on horses, and instances are given by Mr. Darwin of pony breeds 4 having independent- ly arisen in different parts of the world, possessing a cer- tain similarity in their physical conditions. Also changes due to climate may be brought about at once in a second generation, though no appreciable modification is shown 8 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. i., p. 37. 8 Ibid., p. 47. 4 Ibid., p. 52. IV.] MINUTE MODIFICATIONS. H3 by the first. Thus " Sir Charles Lyell mentions that some Englishmen, engaged in conducting the operations of the Real del Monte Company in Mexico, carried out with them some greyhounds, of the best breed, to hunt the hares which abound in that country. It was found that the greyhounds could not support the fatigues of a long chase in this at- tenuated atmosphere, and, before they could come up with their prey, they lay down gasping for breath ; but these same annuals have produced whelps, which have grown up, and are not in the least degree incommoded by the want of density in the air, but run down the hares with as much ease as do the fleetest of their race in this country." ' We have here no action of "Natural Selection;" it was not that certain puppies happened accidentally to be capable of enduring more rarefied air, and so survived, but the offspring were directly modified by the action of sur- rounding conditions. Neither was the change elaborated by minute modifications in many successive generations, but appeared at once in the second. With regard once more to sudden alterations of form, Nathusius is said to state positively as to pigs," that the re- sult of common experience and of his experiments was that rich and abundant food, given during youth, tends by some direct action to make the head broader and shorter. Curi- ous jaw appendages often characterize Normandy pigs, ac- cording to M. Eudes Deslongchamps. Richardson figures these appendages on the old " Irish greyhound pig," and they are said by Nathusius to appear occasionally in all the long-eared races. Mr. Darwin observes,7 " As no wild pigs are known to have analogous appendages, we have at pres- ent no reason to suppose that their appearance is due to 6 Carpenter's " Comparative Physiology," p. 987, quoted by Mr. J. J. Murphy, " Habit and Intelligence," yoL L, p. 171. • " Animals and Plants under Domestication," voL i., p. 72. 7 Ibid., p. 76. 114 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. reversion ; and if this be so, we are forced to admit tha somewhat complex, though apparently useless structures may be suddenly developed without the aid of selection." Again, " Climate directly affects the thickness of the skin and hair " of cattle.8 In the English climate an individual Porto Santo rabbit 9 recovered the proper color of its fur in rather less than four years. The effect of the climate of India on the turkey is considerable. Mr. Blyth 10 describes it as being much degenerated in size, " utterly incapable of rising on the wing," of a black color, and " with long pendulous appendages over the beak enormously de- veloped." Mr. Darwin again tells us that there has sud- denly appeared in a bed of common broccoli a peculiar va- riety, faithfully transmitting its newly-acquired and remark- able characters ; " also that there have been a rapid trans- formation and transplantation of American varieties of maize with a European variety ; ia that certainly " the An- con and Manchamp breeds of sheep," and that (all but cer- tainly) Niata cattle, turnspit and pug dogs, jumper and frizzled fowls, short-faced tumbler pigeons, hook-billed ducks, etc., and a multitude of vegetable varieties, have suddenly appeared in nearly the same state as we now see them.13 Lastly, Mr. Darwin tells us that there has been an occasional development (in five distinct cases) in Eng- land of the " japanned " or " black-shouldered peacock," (Pavo nigripennis), a distinct species, according to Dr. Sclater,14 yet arising in Sir J. Trevelyan's flock composed entirely of the common kind, and increasing,." to the extinc- tion of the previously-existing breed."1* Mr. Darwin's only explanation of the phenomena (on the supposition of the 8 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. i., p. 71. 9 Ibid., p. 114. 10 Quoted, ibid., p. 274. » Ibid., p. 324. 12 Ibid., p. 322. 13 Ibid., vol. ii., p. 414. 14 Proc. Zool. Soc. of London, April 24, I860. 15 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. i., p. 291. IV.] MINUTE MODIFICATIONS. 115 species being distinct) is by reversion, owing to a supposed ancestral cross. But he candidly admits, " I have heard of no other such case in the animal or vegetable kingdom." On the supposition of its being only a variety, he observes, "The case is the most remarkable ever recorded of the abrupt appearance of a- new form, which so closely re- sembles a true species, that it has deceived one of the most experienced of living ornithologists." As to plants, M. C. Naudin 18 has given the following instances of the sudden origination of apparently perma- nent forms : " The first case mentioned is that of a poppy, which took on a remarkable variation in its fruit — a crown of secondary capsules being added to the normal central capsule. A field of such poppies was grown, and M. G6p- pert, with seed from this field, obtained still this monstrous form in great quantity. Deformities of ferns are sometimes sought after by fern-growers. They are now always ob- tained by taking spores from the abnormal parts of the monstrous fern ; from which spores ferns presenting the same peculiarities invariably grow. . . . The most remark- able case is that observed by Dr. Godron, of Nancy. In 1861 that botanist observed, among a sowing of Datura, tatula, the fruits of which are very spinous, a single indi- vidual of which the capsule was perfectly smooth. The seeds taken from this plant all furnished plants having the character of this individual. The fifth and sixth generations are now growing without exhibiting the least tendency to revert to the spinous form. More remarkable still, when crossed with the normal Datura tatula, hybrids were pro- duced, which, in the second generation, reverted to the original types, as true hybrids do." There are, then, abundant instances to prove that con- siderable modifications may suddenly develop themselves, 16 Extracted by J. J. Murphy, vol. L, p. 197, from the Quarterly Jour- nal of Science, of October, 1867, p. 527. 116 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. either due to external conditions or to obscure internal causes in the organisms which exhibit them. Moreover, these modifications, from whatever cause arising, are capa- ble of reproduction — the modified individuals " breeding true." The question is, whether new species have been de- veloped by non-fortuitous variations which are insignifi- cant and minute, or whether such variations have been comparatively sudden, and of appreciable size and impor- tance ? Either hypothesis will suit the views here main- tained equally well (those views being opposed only to for- tuitous, indefinite variations), but the latter is the more re- mote from the Darwinian conception, and yet has much to be said in its favor. Prof. Owen considers, with regard to specific origina- tion, that natural history " teaches that the change would be sudden and considerable : it opposes the idea that species are transmitted by minute and slow degrees."1 " An innate tendency to deviate from parental type, oper- ating through periods of adequate duration," being " the most probable nature, or way of operation of the secondary law, whereby species have been derived one from the other." 18 Now, considering the number of instances adduced of sudden modifications in domestic animals, it is somewhat startling to meet with Mr Darwin's dogmatic assertion Jhat it is " a false belief " that natural species have often originated in the same abrupt manner. The belief may be false, but it is difficult to see how its falsehood can be posi- tively asserted. It is demonstrated by Mr. Darwin's careful weighings and measurements that, though little-used parts in domes- tic animals get reduced in weight and somewhat in size, ' " " Anatomy of Vertebrates," vol. iii., p. 795. 18 Ibid., p. 807. IV.] MINUTE MODIFICATIONS. 117 yet that they show no inclination to become truly " rudi- mentary structures." Accordingly he asserts 19 that such rudimentary parts are formed " suddenly by arrest of de- velopment " in domesticated animals, but in wild animals slowly. The latter assertion, however, is a mere assertion ; necessary, perhaps, for the theory of " Natural Selection," but as yet unproved by facts. But why should not these changes take place suddenly in a state of nature ? As Mr. Murphy says,30 " It may be true that we have no evidence of the origin of wild species in this way. But this is not a case in which negative evi- dence proves any thing. We have never witnessed the origin of a wild species by any process whatever ; and if a species were to come suddenly into being in the wild state, as the Ancon Sheep did under domestication, how could you ascertain the fact ? If the first of a newly-begotten species were found, the fact of its discovery would tell nothing about its origin. Naturalists would register it as a very rare species, having been only once met with, but they would have no means of knowing whether it were the first or the last of its race." To this Mr. Wallace has replied (in his review of Mr. Murphy's work in Nature^), by objecting that sudden changes could very rarely be useful, because each kind of animal is a nicely-balanced and adjusted whole, any one sudden modification of which would in most cases be hurt- ful unless accompanied by other simultaneous and harmoni- ous modifications. If, however, it is not unlikely that there is an innate tendency to deviate at certain times, and under certain conditions, it is no more unlikely that that innate tendency should be a harmonious one, calculated to simul- taneously adjust the various parts of the organism to their 19 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 318. 20 " Habit and Intelligence," vol. i., p. 344. «' See December 2, 1869, vol. L, p. 132. 118 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. new relations. The objection as to the sudden abortion of rudimentary organs may be similarly met. Prof. Huxley seems now disposed to accept the, at least occasional, intervention of sudden and considerable varia- tions. In his review of Prof. Kolliker's22 criticisms, he 'A. MITCH ENLARGED HOEIZONTAL SECTION OP THE TOOTH OF A LABYKINTHODON. himself says, 23 "We greatly suspect that she" (i.e., Na- ture) " does make considerable jumps in the way of varia- tion now and then, and that these saltations give rise to 22 " tTber die Darwin'sche Schopfungstheorie : " ein Yortrag, von Kolliker ; Leipzig, 1864. ™ See " Lay Sermons," p. 342. IV.J MIXUTE MODIFICATIONS. 119 some of the gaps which appear to exist in the series of known forms." In addition to the instances brought forward in the second chapter against the minute action of Natural Selec- tion, may be mentioned such structures as the wonderfully folded teeth of the labyrinth odonts. The marvellously com- plex structure of these organs is not merely unaccountable as due to " Natural Selection," but its production by insig- nificant increments of complexity is hardly less difficult to comprehend. Similarly the aborted index of the Potto (Perodicticus) is a structure not likely to have been induced by minute changes; while, as to "Natural Selection," the reduction of the fore-finger to a mere rudiment is inexplicable in- deed ! " How this mutilation can have aided in the strug- HA>0> OF THE POTTO (PERODICTICCS), FEOM LIFE. gle for life, we must confess, baffles our conjectures on the subject ; for that any very appreciable gain to the individual can have resulted from the slightly-lessened degree of re- quired nourishment thence resulting (i. e., from the suppres- sion), seems to us to be an almost absurd proposition."24 Again, to anticipate somewhat, the great group of whales (Cetacea) was fully developed at the deposition of the Eocene strata. On the other hand, we may pretty safely conclude that these animals were absent as late as - ECHINUS, OR S (The spines removed from one-half.) that the symmetrical forms of minerals are undoubtedly due to such causes. It is unnecessary here to do more than al- lude to the beautiful and complex forms presented by inor- 182 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. ganic structures. With regard to organisms, however, the wonderful Acanthometrae and the Polycystina may be men- tioned as presenting complexities of form which can hardly be thought to be due to other than internal causes. The same may be said of the great group of Echinoderms, with their amazing variety of component parts. If, then, internal forces can so build up the most varied structures, they are surely capable of producing the serial, lateral, and vertical symmetries which higher animal forms exhibit. Mr. Spen- cer is the more bound to admit this, inasmuch as in his doc- trine of " physiological units " he maintains that these or- ganic atoms of his have an innate power of building up and evolving the whole and perfect animal from which they were in each case derived. To build up and evolve the various symmetries here spoken of is not one whit more mysterious. Directly to refute Mr. Spencer's assertion, however, would require the bringing forward of examples of organisms which are ill-adapted to their positions, and out of harmony with their surroundings — a difficult task indeed.8 Secondly, as regards the last-mentioned author's expla- nation of such serial homology as exists in the centipede and its allies, the very groundwork is open to objection. Mul- tiplication by spontaneous fission seems from some recent 8 Just as Buffon's superfluous lament over the unfortunate organiza- tion of the sloth has been shown, by the increase of our knowledge, to have been uncalled for and absurd, so other supposed instances of non- adaptation will, no doubt, similarly disappear. Mr. Darwin, in his " Ori- gin of Species," 5th edition, p. 220, speaks of a woodpecker (Colaples campestris) as having an organization quite at variance with its habits, and as never climbing a tree, though possessed of the special arboreal structure of other woodpeckers. It now appears, however, from the ob- servations of Mr. W. H. Hudson, C. M. Z. S., that its habits are in har- mony with its structure. See Mr. Hudson's third letter to the Zoological Society, published in the Proceedings of that Society for March 24, 1870, p. 159. VIII.] HOMOLOGIES. 183 researches to be much less frequent than has been sup- posed, and more evidence is required as to the fact of the habitual propagation of any planariae in this fashion." But even if this were as asserted, nevertheless it fails to explain AN ANNELID DITTOING SPONTANEOUSLY. (A new head having been formed toward the hinder end of the body of the parent) the peculiar condition presented by Syttis and some other annelids, where a new head is formed at intervals in certain segments of the body. Here there is evidently an innate 9 Dr. Cobbold has informed the author that he has never observed a planaria divide spontaneously, and he is skeptical as to that process taking place at all. Dr. H. Charlton Bastian has also stated that, hi spite of much observation, he has never seen the process in vorticella. 184 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. tendency to the development at intervals of a complex whole. It is not the budding out or spontaneous fission of certain segments, but the transformation in a definite and very peculiar manner of parts which already exist into other and more complex parts. Again, the processes of development presented by some of these creatures do not by any means point to an origin, through the linear coales- cence of primitively distinct animals by means of imperfect segmentation. Thus in certain Diptera (two-winged flies) the legs, wings, eyes, etc., are derived from masses of form- ative tissue (termed imaginal disks), which by their mutual approximation together build up parts of the head and body,10 recalling to mind the development of Echiiioderms, Again, Nicholas Wagner found in certain other Diptera, the Hessian flies, that the larva gives rise to secondary lar- vae within it, which develop and burst the body of the pri- mary larva. The secondary larvae give rise, similarly, to another set within them, and these again to another " set. Again, the fact, that in Tcenia echinococcits one egg produces numerous individuals, tends to invalidate the ar- gument that the increase of segments during development is a relic of specific genesis. Mr. H. Spencer seems to deny serial homology to the mollusca, but it is difficult to see why the shell segments of chiton are not such homologues because the segmenta- tion is superficial. Similarly the external processes of eolis, doris, etc., are good examples of serial homology, as also are plainly the successive chambers of the orthoceratidae. Nor are parts of a series less serial, because arranged spi- rally, as in most gasteropods. Mr. Spencer observes of the molluscous as of the vertebrate animal, " You cannot cut it into transverse slices, each of which contains a digestive or- gan, a respiratory organ, a reproductive organ, etc." 12 But 10 Prof. Huxley's Hunterian Lecture, March 16, 1868. 11 Ibid., March 18. 12 "Principles of Biology," vol. ii., p. 105 VIII.] HOMOLOGIES. 185 the same may be said of every single arthropod and annelid if it be meant that all these organs are not contained in every possible slice. While if it be meant that parts of all such organs are contained in certain slices, then some of the mollusca may also be included. Another objection to Mr. Spencer's speculation is de- rived from considerations which have already been stated, as to past time. For if the anmilose animals have been formed by aggregation, we ought to find this process much less perfect in the oldest form. But a complete develop- ment, such as already obtains in the lobster, etc., was reached by the Eurypterida and Trilobites of the palaeozoic strata ; and annelids, probably formed mainly like those of the present day, abounded during the deposition of the oldest fossiliferous rocks. Thirdly, and lastly, as regards such serial homology as is exemplified by the backbone of man, there are also sev- eral objections to Mr. Spencer's mechanical explanation. On the theory of evolution most in favor, the first Ver- tebrata were aquatic. Now, as natation is generally effected by repeated and vigorous lateral flexions of the body, we ought to find the segmentation much more complete laterally than on the dorsal and ventral aspects of the spinal column. 186 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Nevertheless, in those species which, taken together, con- stitute a series of more and more distinctly segmented forms, the segmentation gradually increases all around the central part of the spinal column. Mr. Spencer 13 thinks it probable that the sturgeon has retained the notochordal (that is, the primitive, unsegment- ed) structure because it is sluggish. But Dr. Glinther in- forms me that the sluggishness of the common tope ( Galeus vulgaris) is much like that of the sturgeon, and yet the bodies of its vertebrae are distinct and well ossified. More- over, the great salamander of Japan is much more inert and sluggish than either, and yet it has a well-developed, bony spine. I can learn nothing of the habits of the sharks Hexan- ckus, Heptanchus, and Echinorhinus, but Mliller describes them as possessing a persistent chorda dorsalis).1* It may be they have the habits of the tope, but other sharks are among the very swiftest and most active of fishes. In the bony pike (lepidosteus), the rigidity of the bony scales by which it is completely enclosed must prevent any excessive flexion of the body, and yet its vertebral column presents a degree of ossification and vertebral completeness greater than that found in any other fish whatever. Mr. Spencer supports his argument by the iion-segraen- tation of the anterior end of the skeletal axis, i. e., by the non-segmentation of the skull. But in fact the skull is seg- mented, and, according to the quasi-vertebral theory of the skull put forward by Prof. Huxley,16 is probably formed of a number of coalesced segments, of some of which the tra- beculae cranii and the mandibular and hyoidean arches are indications. What is, perhaps, most remarkable, however, 13 " Principles of Biology," vol. ii., p. 203. 14 Quoted by H. Stannius in his " Handbuch der Anatomie der Wir- belthiere," Zweite Auflage, Erstes Buch, § 7, p. 17. 15 In his last Hunterian Course of Lectures, 1869. VIIL] HOMOLOGIES. 187 is, that the segmentation of the skull — its separation into the three occipital, parietal, and frontal elements — is most complete and distinct in the highest class, and this can have nothing, however remotely, to do with the cause suggested by Mr. Spencer. Thus, then, there is something to be said in opposition to both the aggregational and the mechanical explanations of serial homology. The explanations suggested are very ingenious, yet repose upon a very small basis of fact. Not but that the process of vertebral segmentation may have been sometimes assisted by the mechanical action sug- gested. It remains now to consider what are the evidences in support of the existence of an internal power, by the action of which these homological manifestations are evolved. It is here contended that there is good evidence of the exist- ence of some such special internal power, and that not only from facts of comparative anatomy, but also from those of teratology 16 and pathology. These facts appear to show, not only that there are homological internal relations, but that they are so strong and energetic as to reassert and re- exhibit themselves in creatures which, on the Darwinian theory, are the descendants of others in which they were much less marked. They are, in fact, sometimes even more plain and distinct in animals of the highest types than in inferior forms ; and, moreover, this deep-seated tendency acts even in diseased and abnormal conditions. Mr. Darwin recognizes17 these homological relations, and does " not doubt that they may be mastered more or less completely by Natural Selection." He does not, how- ever, give any explanation of these phenomena other than the imposition on them of the name " laws of correlation ; " 16 " The Science of Abnormal Forms." 17 "Animab and Plants under Domestication," voL iL, p. 322; and " Origin of Species," 5th edit., 1869, p. 178. 188 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. and indeed he says, " The nature of the bond of correlation is frequently quite obscure." Now, it is surely more desir- able to make use, if possible, of one conception than to im- agine a number of, to all appearance, separate and inde- pendent " laws of correlation " between different parts of each animal. But even some of these alleged laws hardly appear well founded. Thus Mr. Darwin, in support of such a law of concomitant variation as regards hair and teeth, brings for- ward the case of Julia Pastrana,18 and a man of the Burmese court, and adds : 19 " These cases and those of the hairless dogs forcibly call to mind the fact that the two orders of mammals, namely, the Edentata and Cetacea, which are the most abnormal in their dermal covering, are likewise THE AARD-VAKK (ORYCTEROPTTS). the most abnormal either by deficiency" or redundacy of teeth." The assertion with regard to these orders is cer- 18 A remarkable woman exhibited in London a few years ago. 19 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 328. VIII.] HOMOLOGIES. 189 tainly true, but it should be borne in mind at the same time that the armadillos, which are much more abnormal than are the American ant-eaters as regards their dermal cover- ing, in their dentition are less so. The Cape ant-eater, on the other hand, the Aard-vark (Orycteropus), has teeth formed on a type quite different from that existing in any other mammal ; yet its hairy coat is not known to exhibit THE PANGOLIN (MAN is). any such strange peculiarity. Again, those remarkable scaly ant-eaters of the Old World — the pangolins (Manis) — stand alone among mammals as regards their dermal cov- ering ; having been classed with lizards by early naturalists on account of their clothing of scales, yet their mouth is like that of the hairy ant-eaters of the New World. On the other hand, the duck-billed platypus of Australia (Orni- thorhynchus) is the only mammal which has teeth formed of 190 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. horn, yet its furry coat is normal and ordinary. Again, the Dugong and Manatee are dermally alike, yet extremely dif- ferent as regards the structure and number of their teeth. The porcupine also, in spite of its enormous armature of quills, is furnished with as good a supply of teeth as are the hairy members of the same family, but not with a bet- ter one ; and in spite of the deficiency of teeth in the hair- less dogs, no converse redundancy of teeth has, it is believed, been remarked in Angora cats and rabbits. To say the least, then, this law of correlation presents numerous and remarkable exceptions. To return, however, to the subject of homological rela- tions: it is surely inconceivable that indefinite variation with survival of the fittest can ever have built up these serial, bilateral, and vertical homologies, without the ac- tion of some special innate power or tendency so to build up, possessed by the organism itself in each case. By " special tendency " is meant one the laws and conditions of which are as yet unknown, but which is analogous to the innate power and tendency possessed by crystals similarly, to build up certain peculiar and veisy definite forms. First, with regard to comparative anatomy. The cor- respondence between the thoracic and pelvic limbs is no- torious. Prof. Gegenbaur has lately endeavored 20 to explain this resemblance by the derivation of each limb from a primitive form of fin. This fin is supposed to have had a marginal external (radial) series of cartilages, each of which supported a series of secondary cartilages, starting from the inner (ulnar) side of the distal part of the support- ing marginal piece. The root marginal piece would become the humerus or femur, as the case might be : the second marginal piece, with the piece attached to the inner side of the distal end of the root marginal piece, would 20 " TJeber das Gliedmaassenskelet der Enaliosaurier, Jenaischen Zeit- schrift," Bd. v. Heft 3, Taf. xiii. HOMOLOGIES. 191 together form either the radius and ulna or the tibia and fibula, and so on. Now there is little doubt (from a priori considerations) but that the special differentiation of the limb-bones of the higher Vertebrates has been evolved from anterior condi- tions existing in some fish-like form or other. But the particular view advocated by the learned professor is open to criticism. Thus, it may be objected against this view, first, that it takes no account of the radial ossicle which becomes so enormous in the mole ; secondly, that it does not explain the extra series of ossicles which are formed on the outer (radial or marginal) side of the paddle in the Ich- thyosaurus ; and thirdly, and most importantly, that even if this had been the way in which the limbs had been dif- ferentiated, it would not be at all inconsistent with the possession of an innate power of producing, and an innate tendency to produce similar and symmetrical homological resemblances. It would not be so because resemblances of the kind are found to exist, which, on the Darwinian theory, must be subsequent and secondary, not primitive and ancestral. Thus we find in animals of the eft kind SKELETON OF AX ICHTHYOSAURUS. (certain amphibians), in which the tarsus is cartilaginous, that the carpus is cartilaginous likewise. And we shall see in cases of disease and of malformation what a ten- dency there is to a similar affection of homologous parts. 192 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. In efts, as Prof. Gegenbaur himself has pointed out,21 there is a striking correspondence between the bones or cartilages supporting the arm, wrist, and fingers, and those A. SKELETON OF ANTERIOR EXTREMITY OF AN EFT. B. SKELETON OF POSTERIOR EXTREMITY OF THE SAME. sustaining the leg, ankle, and toes, with the exception that the toes exceed the fingers in number by one. Yet these animals are far from being the root-forms from SKELETON OF A PLESIOSATTRTTS. which all the Vertebrata have diverged, as is evidenced from the degree of specialization which their structure presents. 21 In his work on the Carpus and Tarsus. VIII.] HOMOLOGIES. 193 If they have descended from such primitive forms as Prof. Gegenbaur imagines, then they have built up a sec- ondary serial homology — a repetition of similar modifica- tions— fully as remarkable as if it were primary. The Ple- siosauria — those extinct marine reptiles of the Secondary period, with long necks, small heads, and paddle-like limbs — are of yet higher organization than are the efts and other Amphibia. Nevertheless they present us with a similarity of structure between the fore and hind limb, which is so great as almost to be identity. But the Amphibia and Plesiosauria, though not themselves primitive vertebrate types, may be thought by some to have derived their limb structure by direct descent from such. Tortoises, how- ever, must be admitted to be not only highly differentiated organisms, but to be far indeed removed from primeval vertebrate structure. Yet certain tortoises 22 (notably Che- lydra Temminckii) exhibit such a remarkable uniform ity in fore and hind limb structure (extending even up to the proximal ends of the humerus and femur) that it is impossible to doubt its independent development in these forms. Again, in the Potto (Perodicticus) there is an extra bone in the foot, situated in the transverse ligament enclos- ing the flexor tendons. It is noteworthy that in the hand of the same animal a serially homologous structure should also be developed.33 In the allied form called the slow lemur (Nycticebus) we have certain arrangements of the muscles and tendons of the hand which reproduce in great measure those of the foot, and vice versa.™ And in the Hyrax another myological resemblance appears.28 It is, 22 An excellent specimen displaying this resemblance is preserved in the Museum of the Royal College of Surgeons. 23 Phil. Trans., 1867, p. 353. M Proc. ZooL Soc., 1865, p. 255. 83 Ibid., p. 351. 9 194 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. however, needless to multiply instances which can easily be produced in large numbers if required. P.t LONG FLEXOK MUSCLES AND TENDONS OP THE HAND. P.t. Pronator teres. F.8. Flexor sublimis digitorum. F.p. Flexor profondus digitonun. F.l.p. Flexor longus pollicis. Secondly, with regard to teratology, it is notorious that similar abnormalities are often found to coexist in both the pelvic and thoracic limbs. VIII.] HOROLOGIES. 195 M. Isidore Geoffrey St.-Hilaire remarks,26 " L'anomalie se repete d'un membre thoracique au membre abdominal du meme cote"." And he afterward quotes Weitbrecht,27 who had " observe dans un cas 1'absence simultan^e aux deux mains et aux deux pieds, de quelques doigts, de quel- ques metacarpiens et metatarsiens, enfin de quelques os du carpe et du tarse." Prof. Burt G. Wilder, in his paper on extra digits,88 has recorded no less than twenty-four cases where such excess coexisted in both little fingers ; also one case in which the right little finger and little toe were so af- fected ; six in which it was both the little fingers and both the little toes ; and twenty-two other cases more or less the same, but in which the details were not accurately to be obtained. Mr. Darwin cites 2* a remarkable instance of what he is inclined to regard as the development in the foot of birds of a sort of representation of the wing-feathers of the hand. He says : " In several distinct breeds of the pigeon and fowl the legs and the two outer toes are heavily feathered, so that, in the trumpeter pigeon, they appear like little wings. In the feather-legged bantam, the 'boots,' or feathers, which grow from the outside of the leg, and gen- erally from the two outer toes, have, according to the ex- cellent authority of Mr. Hewitt, been seen to exceed the wing-feathers in length, and in one case were actually ^ine and a half inches in length ! As Mr. Blyth has re- marked to me, these leg-feathers resemble the primary wing- feathers, and are totally unlike the fine down which naturally grows on the legs of some birds, such as grouse and owls. 56 "Hist. Generate des Anomalies," t. i., p. 228. Bruxelles, 1837. 87 Nov. Comment. Petrop. t. ix., p.,269. 28 Read on June 2, 1868, before the Massachusetts Medical Society. See voL ii., No. 3. 29 « Animals and Plants under Domestication," voL ii., p. 322. 196 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Hence it may be suspected that excess of food has first given redundancy to the plumage, and then that the law of homologous variation has led to the development of feathers on the legs, in a position corresponding with those on the wing, namely, on the outside of the tarsi and toes. I am strengthened in this belief by the following curious case of correlation, which for a long time seemed to me utterly inexplicable — namely, that in pigeons of any breed, if the legs are feathered, the two outer toes are partially connected by skin. These two outer toes correspond with our third and fourth toes. Now, in the wing of the pigeon, or any other bird, the first and fifth digits are wholly abort- ed ; the second is rudimentary, and carries the so-called 'bastard wing;' while the third and fourth digits are completely united and enclosed by skin, together forming the extremity of the wing. So that in feather -footed pigeons not only does the exterior surface support a row of long feathers like wing-feathers, but the very same digits which in the wing are completely united by skin be- come partially united by skin in the feet ; and thus, by the law of the correlated variation of homologous parts, we can understand the curious connection of feathered legs and membrane between the outer toes." Irregularities in the circulating system are far from un- common, and sometimes illustrate this homological ten- dency. My friend and colleague Mr. George G. Gascoyen, assistant surgeon at St. Mary's Hospital, has supplied me with two instances of symmetrical affections which have come under his observation. Tn the first of these the brachial artery bifurcated al- most at its origin, the two halves reuniting at the elbow- joint, and then dividing into the radial and ulnar arteries in the usual manner. In the second case an aberrant ar- tery was given off from the radial side of the brachial artery, again almost at its origin. This aberrant artery VIII.l HOMOLOGIES. 197 anastomosed below the elbow-joint with the radial side of the radial artery. In each of these cases the right and left sides varied in precisely the same manner. Thirdly, as to pathology. Mr. James Paget,30 speaking of symmetrical diseases, says : " A certain morbid change of structure on one side of the body is repeated in the exactly corresponding part of the other side." He then quotes and figures a diseased lion's pelvis from the College of Surgeons Museum, and says of it : " Multiform as the pattern is in which the new bone, the product of some dis- ease comparable with a human rheumatism, is deposited — a pattern more complex and irregular than the spots upon a map — there is not one spot or line on one side which is not represented, as exactly as it would be in a mirror, on the other. The likeness has more than daguerreotype ex- actness." He goes on to observe : " I need not describe many examples of such diseases. Any out-patients' room will furnish abundant instances of exact symmetry in the eruptions of eczema, lepra, and psoriasis ; in the deformi- ties of chronic rheumatism, the paralysis from lead ; in the eruptions excited by iodide of potassium or copaiba. And any large museum will contain examples of equal symme- try in syphilitic ulcerations of the skull ; in rheumatic and syphilitic deposits on the tibias and other bones ; in all the effects of chronic rheumatic arthritis, whether in the bones, the ligaments, or the cartilages ; in the fatty and earthy de- posits in the coats of arteries." S1 He also considered it to be proved that, " next to the parts which are symmetrically placed, none are so nearly identical in composition as those which are homologous. For example, the backs of the hands and of the feet, or the palms and soles, are often not only symmetrically, but simi- larly, affected with psoriasis. So are the elbows and the 30 "Lectures on Surgical Pathology," 1853, voL i., p. 18. 31 Ibid., p. 22. 198 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. knees ; and similar portions of the thighs and the arms may be found affected with icthyosis. Sometimes also specimens of fatty and earthy deposits in the arteries occur, in which exact similarity is shown in the plan, though not in the de- gree, with which the disease affects severally the humeral and femoral, the radial and peroneal, the ulnar and pos- terior tibial arteries." Dr. William Budd 32 gives numerous instances of sym- metry in disease, both lateral and serial. Thus, among others, we have one case (William Godfrey), in which the hands and feet were distorted. "The distortion of the right hand is greater than that of the left, of the right foot greater than that of the left foot." In another (Elizabeth Alford) lepra affected the extensor surfaces of the thoracic and pelvic limbs. Again, in the case of skin-disease illus- trated in Plate III., " The analogy between the elbows and knees is clearly expressed in the fact that these were the only parts affected with the disease."3 Prof. Burt Wilder,34 in his paper on " Pathological Po- larities," strongly supports the philosophical importance of these peculiar relations, adding arguments in favor of antero-posterior homologies, which it is here unnecessary to discuss, enough having been said, it is believed, to thor- oughly demonstrate the existence of these deep internal relations which are named lateral and serial homologies. What explanation can be offered of these phenomena ? To say that they exhibit a " nutritional relation " brought about by a " balancing of forces " is merely to give a new denomination to the unexplained fact. The changes are, of course, brought about by a " nutritional " process, and 32 See " Medico-Chirurgical Transactions," vol. xxv. (or vii. of 2d series), 1842, p. 100, PL III. 33 Med.-Chinirg. Trans, vol. xxv. (or vii. of 2d series), 1842, p. 122. 34 See Boston Medical and Surgical Journal for April 5, 1866, vol. Ixxiv., p. 189. VHI.] HOMOLOGIES. 199 the symmetry is undoubtedly the result of a " balance of forces," but to say so is a truism. The question is, What is the cause of this " nutritional balancing ? " It is here contended that it must be due to an internal cause which at present science is utterly incompetent to explain. It is an internal property possessed by each living organic whole as well as by each non-living crystalline mass, and that there is such internal power or tendency, which may be spoken of as a " polarity," seems to be demonstrated by the instances above given, which can easily be multiplied indefinitely. Mr. Herbert Spencer 35 (speaking of the reproduction, by budding, of a Begonia-leaf) recognizes a power of the kind. He says, " We have, therefore, no alternative but to say that the living particles composing one of these fragments have an innate tendency to arrange themselves into the shape of the organism to which they belong. We must in- fer that a plant or animal of any species is made up of special units, in all of which there dwells the intrinsic apti- tude to aggregate into the form of that species ; just as, in the atoms of a salt, there dwells the intrinsic aptitude to crystallize in a particular way. It seems difficult to conceive that this can be so ; but we see that it is so." .... " For this property there is no fit term. If we accept the word polarity as a name for the force by which inorganic units are aggregated into a form peculiar to them, we may apply this word to the analogous force displayed by organic limits." Dr. Jeffries Wyman,36 in his paper on the " Symmetry and Homology of Limbs," has a distinct chapter on the " Analogy between Symmetry and Polarity," illustrating it by the effects of magnets on "particles in a polar con- dition." 35 "Principles of Biology," vol. i., p. 180. 36 See the " Proceedings of the Boston Society of Natural History," vol. XL, June 5, 1867. 200 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Mr. J. J. Murphy, after noticing " the power which crys- tals have to repair injuries inflicted on them and the modifi- cations they undergo through the influence of the medium in which they may be formed, goes on to say : 38 " It needs no proof that in the case of spheres and crystals the forms and the structures are the effect, and not the cause, of the form- ative principles. Attraction, whether gravitative or cap- illarv, produces the spherical form ; the spherical form does not produce attraction. And crystalline polarities produce crystalline structure and form; crystalline structure and form do not produce crystalline polarities. The same is not quite so evident of organic forms, but it is equally true of them also." .... " It is not conceivable that the micro- scope should reveal peculiarities of structure corresponding to peculiarities of habitual tendency in the embryo, which at its first formation has no structure whatever ;" 89 and he adds that " there is something quite inscrutable and mysterious " in the formation of a new individual from the germinal mat- ter of the embryo. In another place 40 he says : " We know that in crystals, notwithstanding the variability of form within the limits of the same species, there are definite and very peculiar formative laws, which cannot possibly depend on any thing like organic functions, because crystals have no such functions ; and it ought not to surprise us if there are similar formative or morphological laws among organ- isms which, like the formative laws of crystallization, can- not be referred to any relation of form or structure to func- tion. Especially, I think is this true of the lowest organ- isms, many of which show great beauty of form, of a kind that appears to be altogether due to symmetry of growth ; as the beautiful star-like rayed forms of the acanthomeirce, which are low animal organisms not very different from the Foraminifera." Their " definiteness of form does not appear 37 " Habit and Intelligence," vol. i., p. 75. s8 Ibid., p. 112. 39 Ibid., p. 170. 4° Ibid., vol. L, p. 229. HOMOLOGIES. 201 to be accompanied by any corresponding differentiation of function between different parts ; and, so far as I can see, the beautiful regularity and symmetry of their radiated forms are altogether due to unknown laws of symmetry of growth, just like the equally beautiful and somewhat similar forms of the compound six-rayed, star-shaped crystals of snow." Altogether, then, it appears that each organism has an innate tendency to develop in a symmetrical manner, and that this tendency is controlled and subordinated by the action of external conditions, and not that this symmetry is superinduced only db externo. In fact, that each organism has its own internal and special laws of growth and devel- opment. If, then, it is still necessary to conceive an internal law or " substantial form," moulding each organic being,41 and directing its development as a crystal is built up, only in an indefinitely more complex manner, it is congruous to im- agine the existence of some internal law accounting at the same time for specific divergence as well as for specific identity. A principle regulating the successive evolution of differ- ent organic forms is not one whit more mysterious than is the mysterious power by which a particle of structureless sarcode develops successively into an egg, a grub, a chrysalis, a butterfly, when all the conditions, cosmical, physical, chemical, and vital, are supplied, which are the requisite accompaniments to determine such evolution. 41 It is hardly necessary to say that the author does not mean that there is, in addition to a real objective crystal, another real, objective separate thing beside it, namely the " force " directing it. All that is meant is that the action of the crystal in crystallizing must be ideally separated from the crystal itself, not that it is really separate. 202 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. CHAPTER IX. EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. The Origin of Morals an Inquiry not foreign to .the Subject of this Book.— Modem Utilitarian View as to that Origin.— Mr. Darwin's Speculation as to the Origin of the Abhorrence of Incest.— Cause assigned by him insufficient.— Care of the Aged and Infirm opposed by " Natural Selection ; " also Self-abnegation and Asceticism.— Distinctness of the Ideas " Eight " and " Useful.11— Mr. John Stuart Mill. — Insufficiency of "Natural Selection" to account for the Origin of the Distinction between Duty and Profit— Distinction of Moral Acts in to "Mate- rial " and " Formal." — No Ground for believing that Formal Morality exists in Brutes.— Evidence that it does exist in Savages.— Faculty with which Savages may be misunderstood.— Objections as to Diversity of Customs.— Mr. Button's Keview of Mr. Herbert Spencer. — Ajiticipatory Character of Morals. — Sir John Lubbock's Explanation. — Summary and Conclusion. ANY inquiry into the origin of the notion of " morality " — the- conception of " right " — may, perhaps, be considered as somewhat remote from the question of the Genesis of Species ; the more so, since Mr. Darwin, at one time, dis- claimed any pretension to explain the origin of the- higher psychical phenomena of man. His disciples, however, were never equally reticent, and indeed he himself is now not only about to produce a work on man (in which this question must be considered), but he has distinctly announced the extension of the application of his theory to the very phe- nomena in question. He says : 1 "In the distant future I see open fields for far more important researches. Psy- chology will be based on a new foundation, that of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and capacity by gradation. Light will be thrown on the origin of man 1 " Origin of Species," 5th edit., 1869, p. 577 IX.] EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. 203 and his history." It may not be amiss then to glance slightly at the question, so much disputed, concerning the origin of ethical conceptions and its bearing on the theory of " Natural Selection." The followers of Mr. John Stuart Mill; of Mr. Herbert Spencer, and apparently, also, of Mr. Darwin, assert that in spite of the great present difference between the ideas " useful " and " right," yet that they are, nevertheless, one in origin, and that that origin consisted ultimately of pleas- urable and painful sensations. They say that " Natural Selection " has evolved moral conceptions from perceptions of what was useful, i e., pleas- urable, by having through long ages preserved a predomi- nating number of those individuals who have had a natural and spontaneous liking for practices and habits of mind useful to the race, and that the same power has destroyed a predominating number of those individuals who possessed a marked tendency to contrary practices. The descend- ants of individuals so preserved have, they say, come to inherit such a liking and such useful habits of mind, and that at last (finding this inherited tendency thus existing in themselves, distinct from their tendency lo conscious self- gratification) they have become apt to regard it as funda- mentally distinct, innate, and independent of all experience. In fact, according to this school, the idea of " right " is only the result of the gradual accretion of useful predilec- tions which, from time to time, arose in a series of ances- tors naturally selected. In this way, "morality" is, as it were, the congealed past experience of the race, and " virtue " becomes no more than a sort of " retrieving," which the thus improved human animal practises by a per- fected and inherited habit, regardless of self-gratification, just as the brute animal has acquired the habit of seeking prey and bringing it to his master, instead of devouring it himself. 204 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Though Mr. Darwin has not as yet expressly advocated this view, yet some remarks made by him appear to show his disposition to sympathize with it. Thus in his work on " Animals and Plants under Domestication," 2 he asserts that " the savages of Australia and South America hold the crime of incest in abhorrence ; " but he considers that this abhorrence has probably arisen by "Natural Selection," the ill effects of close interbreeding causing the less numer- ous and less healthy offspring of incestuous unions to dis- appear by degrees, in favor of the descendants (greater both in number and strength) or individuals who naturally, from some cause or other, as he suggests, preferred to mate with strangers rather than with close blood-relations ; this preference being transmitted and becoming thus instinc- tive, or habitual, in remote descendants. But on Mr. Darwin's own ground, it may be objected that this notion fails to account for " abhorrence " and " moral reprobation ; " for, as no stream can rise higher than its source, the original " slight feeling " which was useful would have been perpetuated, but would never have been augmented beyond the degree requisite to insure this beneficial preference, and therefore would not certainly have become magnified into " abhorrence." It will not do to assume that the union of males and females, each pos- sessing the required " slight feeling," must give rise to off- spring with an intensified feeling of the same kind ; for, apart from reversion, Mr. Darwin has called attention to the unexpected modifications which sometimes result from the union of similarly constituted parents. Thus, for ex- ample, he tells us:3 "If two top-knotted canaries are matched, the young, instead of having very fine top-knots, are generally bald." From examples of this kind, it is fair, on Darwinian principles, to infer that the union of parents 2 Vol. ii., p. 122. 8 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. i., p. 295. IX.] EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. 205 who possessed a similar inherited aversion might result in phenomena quite other than the augmentation of such aversion, even if the two aversions should be altogether similar ; while, very probably, they might be so different in their nature as to tend to neutralize each other. Besides, the union of parents so similarly emotional, would be rare indeed among savages, where marriages would be owing to almost any thing rather than to congeniality of mind be- tween the spouses. Mr. Wallace tells us,4 that they choose their wives for "rude health and physical beauty," and this is just what might be naturally supposed. Again, we must bear in mind the necessity there is that many indi- viduals should be similarly and simultaneously affected with this aversion from consanguineous unions; as we have seen in the second chapter, how infallibly variations presented by only a few individuals, tend to be eliminated by mere force of numbers. Mr. Darwin indeed would throw back this aversion, if possible, to a pre-human period ; since he speculates as to whether the gorillas or orang- utans, in effecting their matrimonial relations, show any tendency to respect the prohibited degrees of affinity.6 No tittle of evidence, however, has yet been adduced point- ing in any such direction, though surely if it were of such importance and efficiency as to result (through the aid of " Natural Selection " alone) in that " abhorrence " before spoken of, we might expect to be able to detect unmistak- able evidence of its incipient stages. On the contrary, as regards the ordinary apes (for with regard to the highest there is no evidence of the kind) as we see them in con- finement, it would be difficult to name any animals less re- stricted, by even a generic bar, in the gratification of the sexual instinct. And although the conditions under which they have been observed are abnormal, yet these are 4 " Natural Selection," p. 350. 5 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. iL 206 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. hardly the animals to present us in a state of nature, with an extraordinary and exceptional sensitiveness in such matters. To take an altogether different case. Care of, and ten- derness toward, the aged and infirm are actions on all hands admitted to be " right ; " but it is difficult to see how such actions could ever have been so useful to a community as to have been seized on and developed by the exclusive ac- tion of the law of the " survival of the fittest." On the contrary, it seems probable that on strict utilitarian princi- ples the rigid political economy of Tierra del Fuego would have been eminently favored and diffused by the impartial action of " Natural Selection " alone. B}^ the rigid politi- cal economy referred to, is meant that destruction and utili- zation of " useless mouths " which Mr. Darwin himself de- scribes in his highly interesting " Journal of Researches." ' He says : "It is certainly true, that when pressed in win- ter by hunger, they kill and devour their old women before they kill their dogs. The boy being asked why they did this, answered : ' Doggies catch otters, old woman no.' They often run away into the mountains, but they are pur- sued by the men and brought back to the slaughter-house at their own firesides." Mr. Edward Bartlett, who has recently returned from the Amazons, reports that at one Indian village where the cholera made its appearance, the whole population immediately dispersed into the woods, leaving the sick to perish uncared for and alone. Now, had the Indians remained, undoubtedly far more would have died ; as doubtless, in Tierra del Fuego, the destruction of the comparatively useless old women has often been the means of preserving the healthy and reproductive young. Such acts surely must be greatly favored by the stern and unrelenting action of exclusive " Natural Selection." In the same way that admiration which all feel for acts 6 See 2d edit, vol. i., p. 214. IX.] EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. 207 of self-denial done for the good of others, and tending even toward the destruction of the actor, could hardly be ac- counted for on Darwinian principles alone ; for self-immo- lators must but rarely leave direct descendants, while the community they benefit must by their destruction tend, so far, to morally deteriorate. But devotion to others of the same community is by no means all that has to be account- ed for. Devotion to the whole human race, and devotion to God — in the form of asceticism — have been and are very generally recognized as " good ; " and the author contends that it is simply impossible to conceive that such ideas and sanctions should have been developed by "Natural Selec- tion " alone, from only that degree of unselfishness neces- sary for the preservation of brutally barbarous communities in the struggle for life. That degree of unselfishness once attained, further improvement would be checked by the mutual opposition of diverging moral tendencies and spon- taneous variations in all directions. Added to which, we have the principle of reversion and atavism, tending power- fully to restore and reproduce the more degraded anterior condition whence the later and better state painfully emerged. Very few, however, dispute the complete distinctness, here and now, of the ideas of " duty " and " interest," what- ever may have been the origin of those ideas. No one pre- tends that ingratitude may, in any past abyss of time, have been a virtue, or that it may be such now in Arcturus or the Pleiades. Indeed, a certain eminent writer of the utili- tarian school of ethics has amusingly and very instructively shown how radically distinct even in his own mind are the two ideas which he nevertheless endeavors to identify. Mr. John Stuart Mill, in his examination of " Sir William Ham- ilton's Philosophy," says:7 if "I am informed that the world is ruled by a Being whose attributes are infinite, but 7 Page 103. 208 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. what they are we cannot learn, nor what the principles of his government, except that ' the highest human morality which we are capable of conceiving ' does not sanction them ; convince me of it, and I will bear my fate as I may. But when I am told that I must believe this, and at the same time call this being by the names which express and affirm the highest human morality, I say in plain terms that I will not. Whatever power such a being may have over me, there is one thing which he shall not do : he shall not com- pel me to worship him. I will call no being good, who is not what I mean when I apply that epithet to my fellow- creatures ; and if such a being can sentence me to hell for not so calling him, to hell I will go." This is unquestionably an admirable sentiment on the part of Mr. Mill (with which every absolute moralist will agree), but it contains a complete refutation of his own po- sition, and is a capital instance 8 of the vigorous life of moral intuition in one who professes to have eliminated any fundamental distinction between the " right " and the " ex- pedient." For if an action is morally good, and to be done, merely in proportion to the amount of pleasure it secures, and morally bad and to be avoided as tending to misery, and if it could be proved that by calling God good — whether He is so or not, in our sense of the term — we could secure a maximum of pleasure, and by refusing to do so we should incur endless torment, clearly, on utilitarian princi- ples, the flattery would be good. Mr. Mill, of course, must also mean that, in the matter in question, all men would do well to act with him. There- fore, he must mean that it would be well for all to accept (on the hypothesis above given) infinite and final misery for all as the result of the pursuit of happiness as the only end. 8 I have not the merit of having noticed this inconsistency ; it was pointed out to me by my friend the Kev. W. W. Roberts. IX.] EVOLUTION AXD ETHICS. 209 It must be recollected that in consenting to worship this unholy God, Mr. Mill is not asked to do harm to his neighbor, so that his refusal reposes simply on his percep- tion of the immorality of the requisition. It is also note- worthy that an omnipotent Deity is supposed incapable of altering Mr. Mill's mind and moral perceptions. Mr. Mill's decision is right, but it is difficult indeed to see how, without the recognition of an " absolute morality," he can justify so utter and final an abandonment of all util- ity in favor of a clear and distinct moral perception. These two ideas, the " right " and the " useful," being so distinct here and now, a greater difficulty meets us with regard to their origin from some common source, than met us before when considering the first beginnings of certain bodily structures. For the distinction between the " right " and the " useful " is so fundamental and essential that not only does the idea of benefit not enter into the idea of duty, but we see that the very fact of an act not being beneficial to us makes it the more praiseworthy, while gain tends to diminish the merit of an action. Yet this idea, "right," thus excluding, as it does, all reference to utility or pleas- ure, has nevertheless to be constructed and evolved from utility and pleasure, and ultimately from pleasurable sensa- tions, if we are to accept pure Darwinianism : if we are to accept, that is, the evolution of man's psychical nature and highest powers by the exclusive action of " Natural Selec- tion," from such faculties as are possessed by brutes ; in other words, if we are to believe that the conceptions of the high- est human morality arose through minute and fortuitous variations of brutal desires and appetites in all conceivable directions. It is here contended, on the other hand, that no conser- vation of any such variations could ever have given rise to the faintest beginning of any such moral perceptions ; that by " Natural Selection " alone the maxim fiat Justitia, mat 210 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. ccelum could never have been excogitated, still less have have found a wide-spread acceptance ; that it is impotent to suggest even an approach toward an explanation of the first beginning of the idea of " right." It need hardly be remarked that acts may be distinguished not only as pleasurable, useful, or beautiful, but also as good in two different senses : (1) materially moral acts, and (2) acts which are formally moral. The first are acts good in them- selves, as acts, apart from any intention of the agent which may or may not have been directed toward " right." The second are acts which are good not only in themselves, as acts, but also in the deliberate intention of the agent who recognizes his actions as being " right." Thus acts may be materially moral or immoral, in a very high degree, with- out being in the least formally so. For example, a person may tend and minister to a sick man with scrupulous care and exactness, having in view all the time nothing but the future reception of a good legacy. Another may, in the dark, shoot his own father, taking him to be an assassin, and so commit what is materially an act of parricide, though formally it is only an act of self-defence of more or less culpable rashness. A woman may innocently, because ignorantly, marry a married man, and so commit a material act of adultery. She may discover the facts, and persist, and so make her act formal also. Actions of brutes, such as those of the bee, the ant, or the beaver, however materially good as regards their rela- lations to the community to which such animals belong, are absolutely destitute of the most incipient degree of real, i. e., formal " goodness," because unaccompanied by mental acts of conscious will directed toward the fulfilment of duty. Apology is due for thus stating so elementary a distinction, but the statement is not superfluous, for confusion of thought, resulting from confounding together these very distinct things, is unfortunately far from uncommon. IX.] EVOLUTION" AXD ETHICS. 211 Thus some Darwinians assert that the germs of morality exist in brutes, and we have seen that Mr. Darwin himself speculates on the subject as regards the highest apes. It may safely be affirmed, however, that there is no trace in brutes of any action simulating morality which are not ex- plicable by the fear of punishment, by the hope of pleasure, or by personal affection. No sign of moral reprobation is given by any brute, and yet had such existed in germ through Darwinian abysses of past time, some evidence of its exist- ence must surely have been rendered perceptible through " survival of the fittest " in other forms besides man, if that " survival " has alone and exclusively produced it in him. Abundant examples may, indeed, be brought forward of useful acts which simulate morality, such as parental care of the young, etc. But did the most undeviating habits guide all brutes in such matters, were even aged and infirm members of a community of insects or birds carefully tended by young which benefited by their experience, such acts would not indicate even the faintest rudiment of real, i. e., formal, morality. " Natural Selection " would, of course, often lead to the prevalence of acts beneficial to a commu- nity, and to acts materially good ; but unless they can be shown to be formally so, they are not in the least to the point, they do not offer any explanation of the origin of an altogether new and fundamentally different motive and con- ception. It is interesting, on the other hand, to note Mr. Darwin's statement as to the existence of a distinct moral feeling, even in, perhaps, the very lowest and most degraded of all the human races known to us. Thus in the same " Journal of Researches " 9 before quoted, bearing witness to the exist- ence of moral reprobation on the part of the Fuegians, he says : " The nearest approach to religious feeling which I heard of was shown by York Minster (a Fuegian so named), 9 Vol. i.,'p. 215. 212 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. who, when Mr. Bynoe shot some very fine ducklings as specimens, declared in the most solemn manner, c Oh, Mr. Bynoe, much rain, snow, blow much.' This was evidently a retributive punishment for wasting human food." Mr. Wallace gives the most interesting testimony, in his " Malay Archipelago," to the existence of a very distinct, and in some instances highly-developed moral sense in the natives with whom he came in contact. In one case,10 a Papuan, who had been paid in advance for bird-skins, and who had not been able to fulfil his contract before Mr. "Wal- lace was on the point of starting, " came running down after us holding up a bird, and saying with great satisfaction, ' Now I owe you nothing ! ' " And this though he could have withheld payment with complete impunity. Mr. Wallace's observations and opinions on this head seem hardly to meet with due appreciation in Sir John Lub- bock's recent work on Primitive Man.11 But considering the acute powers of observation and the industry of Mr. Wal- lace, and especially considering the years he passed in fa- miliar and uninterrupted intercourse with natives, his opin- ion and testimony should surely carry with it great weight. He has informed the author that he found a strongly-marked and widely-diffused modesty, in sexual matters, among all the tribes with which he came in contact. In the same way Mr. Bonwick, in his work on the Tasmanians, testifies to the modesty exhibited by the naked females of that race, who by the decorum of their postures gave evidence of the possession in germ of what under circumstances would be- come the highest chastity and refinement. Hasty and incomplete observations and inductions are prejudicial enough to physical science, but when their effect is to degrade untruthfully our common humanity, there is 10 " Malay Archipelago," vol. ii., p. 365. 11 " The Origin of Civilization and the Primitive Condition of Man," p. 261. Longmans, 1870. IX.] EVOLUTION AXD ETHICS. 213 an additional motive to regret them. A hurried visit to a tribe, whose language, traditions, and customs are unknown, is sometimes deemed sufficient for " smart " remarks as to " ape characters," etc., which are as untrue as irrelevant. It should not be forgotten how extremely difficult it is to enter into the ideas and feelings of an alien race. If in the nine- teenth century a French theatrical audience can witness with acquiescent approval, as a type of English manners and ideas, the representation of a marquis who sells his wife at Smithfield, etc. etc., it is surely no wonder if the ideas of a tribe of newly-visited savages should be more or less misunderstood. To enter into such ideas requires long and familiar intimacy, like that experienced by the explorer of the Malay Archipelago. From him, and others, we have abundant evidence that moral ideas exist at least in germ, in savage races of men, while they sometimes attain even a highly-developed state. No amount of evidence as to acts of moral depravity is to the point, as the object here aimed at is to establish that moral intuitions exist in savages, not that their actions are good. Objections, however, are sometimes drawn from the different notions as to the moral value of certain acts, enter- tained by men of various countries or of different epochs ; also from the difficulty of knowing what particular actions in certain cases are the right ones, and from the effects which prejudice, interest, passion, habit, or even, indirectly, physical conditions, may have upon our moral perceptions. Thus Sir John Lubbock speaks ia of certain Feejeeans, who, according to the testimony of Mr. Hunt,13 have the custom of piously choking their parents under certain circum- stances, in order to insure their happiness in a future life. Should any^e take such facts as telling against the belief in an absolute morality, he would show a complete misap- 18 " Primitive Man," p. 248. 13 "Fiji and the Fijians," voL L, p. 183. 214 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. prehension of the point in dispute ; for such facts tell in favor of it. Were it asserted that man possesses a distinct innate power and faculty by which he is made intuitively aware what acts considered in and by themselves are right and what wrong — an infallible and universal internal code — the illustration would be to the point. But all that need be contended for is that the intellect perceives not only truth, but also a quality of " higher " which ought to be followed, and of " lower " which ought to be avoided ; when two lines of conduct are presented to the will for choice, the intellect so acting being the conscience. This has been well put by Mr. James Martineau in his excellent essay on Whe well's Morality. He says : 14 "If moral good were a quality resident in each action, as whiteness in snow, or sweetness in fruits ; and if the moral faculty was our appointed instrument for detecting its presence; many consequences would ensue which are at variance with fact. The wide range of differences observ- able in the ethical judgments of men would not exist ; and even if they did, could no more be reduced and modified by discussion than constitutional differences of hearing or of vision. And, as the quality of moral good either must or must not exist in every important operation of the will,, we should discern its presence or absence separately in each; and even though we never had the conception of more than one insulated action, we should be able to pronounce upon its character. This, however, we have plainly no power to do. Every moral judgment is rela- tive, and involves a comparison of two terms. When we praise what has been done, it is wTith the coexistent con- ception of something else that might hce^j been done; and when we resolve on a course as right, it is to the exclusion of some other that is wrong. This fact, that 14 "Essays," Second Series, vol. ii., p. 13. IX.] EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. 215 every ethical decision is in truth a preference, an election of one act as higher than another, appears of fundamental importance in the analysis of the moral sentiments." From this point of view it is plain how trifling are arguments drawn from the acts of a savage, since an action highly immoral in us might be one exceedingly virtuous in him — being 'the highest presented to his choice in his degraded intellectual condition and peculiar circum- stances. It need only be contended, then, that there is a perception of " right " incapable of further analysis ; not that there is any infallible internal guide as to all the complex actions which present themselves for choice. The principle is given in our nature, the application of the principle is the result of a thousand educational influences. It is no wonder, then, that, in complex " cases of conscience," it is sometimes a matter of exceeding difficulty to determine which of two courses of action is the less objectionable. This no more invalidates the truth of moral principles than does the difficulty of a mathematical problem cast doubt on mathematical principles. Habit, education, and intellectual gifts, facilitate the correct appli- cation of both. Again, if our moral insight is intensified or blunted by our habitual wishes, or, indirectly, by our physical condition, the same may be said of our perception of the true rela- tions of physical facts one to another. An eager wish for marriage has led many a man to exaggerate the powers of a limited income, and a fit of dyspepsia has given an unreasonably gloomy aspect to more than one balance*- sheet. Considering that moral intuitions have to do with insensible matters, they cannot be expected to be more clear than the perception of physical facts. And if the latter perceptions may be influenced by volition, desire, or 216 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. health, our moral views may also be expected to be so influenced, and this in a higher degree because they so often run counter to our desires. A bottle or two of wine may make a sensible object appear double ; what wonder, then, if our moral perceptions are sometimes warped and distorted by such powerful agencies as an evil education or an habitual absence of self-restraint. In neither case does occasional distortion invalidate the accuracy of normal and habitual perception. The distinctness here and now of the ideas of " right " and " useful " is, however, as before said, fully conceded by Mr. Herbert Spencer, although he contends that these con- ceptions are one in root and origin. His utilitarian Genesis of Morals, however, has been recently combated by Mr. Richard Holt Hutton, in a paper which appeared in Macmillarts Magazine.™ This writer aptly objects an argumentum ad 7wminem, applying to morals the same argument that has been ap- plied in this work to our sense of musical harmony, and by Mr. Wallace to the vocal organs of man. Mr. Herbert Spencer's notions on the subject are thus expressed by himself : "To make my position fully under- stood, it seems needful to add that, corresponding to the fundamental propositions of a developed moral science, there have been, and still are, developing in the race certain fundamental intuitions ; and that, though these moral intui- tions are the result of accumulated experiences of utility gradually organized and inherited, they have come to be quite independent of conscious experience. Just in the same way that I believe the intuition of space possessed by any living individual to have arisen from organized and consolidated experiences of all antecedent individuals, who bequeathed to him their slowly-developed nervous organi- zations ; just as I believe that this intuition, requiring only 15 See No. 117, July, 1869, p. 272. IX,] EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. 217 to be made definite and complete by personal experiences, has practically become a form of thought quite independent of experience; — so do I believe that the experiences of utility, organized and consolidated through all past gen- erations of the human race, have been producing corre- sponding nervous modifications which, by continued trans- missions and accumulation, have become in us certain faculties of moral intuition, active emotions responding to right and wrong conduct, which have no apparent basis in the individual experiences of utility. I also hold that, just as the space intuition responds to the exact demonstrations of geometry, and has its rough conclusions interpreted and verified by them, so will moral intuitions respond to the demonstrations of moral science, and will have their rough conclusions interpreted and verified by them." Against this view of Mr. Herbert Spencer, Mr. Hutton objects : " 1. That even as regards Mr. Spencer's illustra- tion from geometrical intuitions, his process would be totally inadequate, since you could not deduce the neces- sary space intuition of which he speaks from any possible accumulations of familiarity with space relations. . . . We cannot inherit more than than our fathers had: no amount of experience of facts, however universal, can give rise to that particular characteristic of intuitions and a priori ideas, which compels us to deny the possibility that in any other world, however otherwise different, our experience (as to space relations) could be otherwise. "2. That the case of moral intuitions is very much stronger. " 3. That if Mr. Spencer's theory accounts for any thing, it accounts not for the deepening of a sense of .utility and inutility into right and wrong, but for the drying up of the sense of utility and inutility into mere inherent tendencies, which would exercise over us not more authority but less, than a rational sense of utilitarian issues. 10 218 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. "4. That Mr. Spencer's theory could not account for the intuitional sacredness now attached to individual moral rules and principles, without accounting a fortiori for the general claim of the greatest-happiness principle over us as the final moral intuition — which is conspicuously contrary to the fact, as not even the utilitarians themselves plead any instinctive or intuitive sanction for their great principle. " 5. That there is no trace of positive evidence of any single instance of the transformation of a utilitarian rule of right into an intuition, since we find no utilitarian principle of the most ancient times which is now an accepted moral intuition, nor any moral intuition, however sacred, which has not been promulgated thousands of years ago, and which has not constantly had to stop the tide of utilitarian objections to its authority — and this age after age, in our own day quite as much as in days gone by. . . . Surely, if any thing is remarkable in the history of morality, it is the anticipatory character, if I may use the expression, of moral principles — the intensity and absoluteness with which they are laid down ages before the world has approximated to the ideal thus asserted." Sir John Lubbock, in his work on Primitive Man before referred to, abandons Mr. Spencer's explanation of the gene- sis of morals while referring to Mr. Button's criticisms on the subject. Sir John proposes to substitute " deference to authority " instead of " sense of interest " as the origin of our conception of " duty," saying that what has been found to be beneficial has been traditionally inculcated on the young, and thus has become to be disassociated from " in- terest " in the mind, though the inculcation itself originally sprung from that source. This, however, when analyzed, turns out to be a distinction without a difference. It is nothing but utilitarianism, pure and simple, after all. For it can never be intended that authority is obeyed because of an intuition that it should be deferred to, for that would IX.] EVOLUTION AXD ETHICS. 219 be to admit the very principle of absolute morality which Sir John combats. It must be meant, then, that authority is obeyed through fear of the consequences of disobedience, or through pleasure felt in obeying the authority which commands. In the latter case we have " pleasure " as the end and no rudiment of the conception of " duty." In the former we have fear of punishment, which appeals directly to the sense of " utility to the individual," and no amount of such a sense will produce the least germ of " ought," which is a conception different in kind, and in which the notion of " punishment " has no place. Thus, Sir John Lubbock's explanation only concerns a mode in which the sense of " duty " may be stimulated or appealed to, and makes no approximation to an explanation of its origin. Could the views of Mr. Herbert Spencer, of Mr. Mill, or of Mr. Darwin, on this subject be maintained, or should they come to be generally accepted, the consequences would be disastrous indeed ! Were it really the case that virtue was re kind of " retrieving" then certainly we should have to view with apprehension the spread of intellectual culti- vation, which would lead the human " retrievers " to regard from a new point of view then* fetching and carrying. We should be logically compelled to acquiesce in the vocifera- tions of some Continental utilitarians, who would banish altogether the senseless words " duty " and " merit ; " and then, one important influence which has aided human prog- ress being withdrawn, we should be reduced to hope that in this case the maxim cessante cama cessat ipse effectus might through some incalculable accident fail to apply. It is true that Mr. Spencer tries to erect a safeguard against such moral disruption, by asserting that for every immoral act, word, or thought, each man during this life receives minute and exact retribution, and that thus a re- gard for individual self-interest will effectually prevent any moral catastrophe. But by what means will he enforce the 220 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. acceptance of a dogma which is not only incapable of proof, but is opposed to the commonly-received opinion of man- kind in all ages ? Ancient literature, sacred and profane, teems with protests against the successful evil-doer, and certainly, as Mr. Hutton observes,18 "Honesty must have been associated by our ancestors with many unhappy as well as many happy consequences, and we know that in ancient Greece dishonesty was openly and actually asso- ciated with happy consequences. . . . when the concen- trated experience of previous generations was held, not in- deed to justify, but to excuse by utilitarian considerations, craft, dissimulation, sensuality, selfishness." This dogma is opposed to the moral consciousness of many as to the events of their own lives ; and the author, for one, believes that it is absolutely contrary to fact. History affords multitudes of instances, but an example may be selected from one of the most critical periods of modern times. Let it be granted that Louis XVI. of France and his queen had all the defects attributed to them by the most hostile of serious historians; let all the excuses possible be made for his predecessor, Louis XV., and also for Madame de Pompadour, can it be pre- tended that there are grounds for affirming that the vices of the two former so far exceeded those of the latter, that their respective fates were plainly and evidently just ? that while the two former died in their beds, after a life of the most extreme luxury, the others merited to stand forth through coming time as examples of the most appalling and calamitous tragedy ? This theme, however, is too foreign to the immediate matter in hand to be further pursued, tempting as it is. But a passing protest against a superstitious and deluding dogma may stand — a dogma which may, like any other dogma, be vehemently asserted and maintained, but which 16 Hacmillarfs Magazine, No. 117, July, 1869. IX.] EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. 221 is remarkable for being destitute, at one and the same time, of both authoritative sanction and the support of reason and observation. To return to the bearing of moral conceptions on " Nat- ural Selection," it seems that, from the reasons given in this chapter, we may safely affirm : 1. That " Natural Se- lection " could not have produced, from the sensations of pleasure and pain experienced by brutes, a higher degree of morality than was useful ; therefore it could have pro- duced any amount of " beneficial habits," but not abhor- rence of certain acts as impure and sinful. 2. That it could not have developed that high esteem for acts of care and tenderness to the aged and infirm which actually exists, but would rather have perpetuated certain low social conditions which obtain in some savage locali- ties. 3. That it could not have evolved from ape sensations the noble virtue of a Marcus Aurelius, or the loving but manly devotion of a St. Louis. 4. That, alone, it could not have given rise to the maxim fiatjustitia, mat ccelum. 5. That the interval between material and formal mo- rality is one altogether beyond its power to traverse. Also, that the anticipatory character of moral principles is a fatal bar to that explanation of their origin which is offered to us by Mr. Herbert Spencer. And, finally, that the solution of that origin proposed recently by Sir John Lubbock is a mere version of simple utilitarianism, appeal- ing to the pleasure or safety of the individual, and there- fore utterly incapable of solving the riddle it attacks. Such appearing to be the case as to the power of " Nat- ural Selection," we, nevertheless, find moral conceptions — formally moral ideas — not only spread over the civilized world, but manifesting themselves unmistakably (in how- ever rudimentary a condition, and however misapplied) 222 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. among the lowest and most degraded of savages. If from among these, individuals can be brought forward who seem to be destitute of any moral conception, similar cases also may easily be found in highly-civilized communities. Such cases tell no more against moral intuitions than do cases of color-blindness or idiotism tell against sight and reason. We have thus a most important and conspicuous fact, the existence of which is fatal to the theory of " Natural Selec- tion," as put forward of late by Mr. Darwin and his most ardent followers. It must be remarked, however, that what- ever force this fact may have against a belief in the origi- nation of man from brutes by minute, fortuitous variations, it has no force whatever against the conception of the or- derly evolution and successive manifestation of specific forms by ordinary natural law — even if we include among such the upright frame, the ready hand, and massive brain, of man himself. X.] PAXGEXESIS. 223 CHAPTER X. PANGENESIS. A Provisional Hypothesis supplementing " Natural Selection."— Statement of the Hy- pothesis.—Difficulty as to Multitude of Gemmules.— As to Certain Modes of Ee- prodnction. — As to Formations without the Requisite Gemmules. — Mr. Lewes and Prof. Delpino.— Difficulty as to Developmental Force of Gemmules.— As to their Spontaneous Fission.— Pangenesis and Vitalism.— Paradoxical Eeality.— Pangene- sis scarcely superior to Anterior Hypothesis. — Buffon. — Owen. — Herbert Spen- cer.— " Gemmules " as Mysterious as "Physiological Units." — Conclusion. IN addition to the theory of " Natural Selection," by which it has been attempted to account for the origin of species, Mr. Darwin has also put forward what he modestly terms " a provisional hypothesis" (that of JPangenesis)J'by which to account for the origin of each and every individ- ual form. Now, though the hypothesis of Pangenesis is no neces- sary part of " Natural Selection," still any treatise on spe- cific origination would be incomplete if it did not take into consideration this last speculation of Mr. Darwin. The hypothesis in question maybe stated as follows : That each living organism is ultimately made up of an almost infinite number of minute particles, or organic atoms, termed " gem- mules," each of which has the power of reproducing its kind. Moreover, that these particles circulate freely about the organism which is made up -of them, and are derived from all the parts of all the organs of the less remote an- cestors of each such organism during all the states and stages of such several ancestors' existence ; and therefore of the several states of each of such ancestors' organs. That such a complete collection of gemmules is aggregated in 224: THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. each ovum and spermatozoon in most animals, and each part capable of reproducing by gemmation (budding) in the low- est animals and in plants. Therefore in many of such low- er organisms such a congeries of ancestral gemmules must exist in every part of their bodies, since in them every part is capable of reproducing by gemmation. Mr. Darwin must evidently admit this, since he says : " It has often been said by naturalists that each cell of a plant has the actual or potential capacity of reproducing the whole plant ; but it has this power only in virtue of containing gemmules derived from every part" l Moreover, these gemmules are supposed to tend to aggregate themselves, and to reproduce in certain definite relations to other gemmules. Thus, when the foot of an eft is cut off, its reproduction is explained by Mr. Darwin as resulting from the aggregation of those floating gem- mules which come next in order to those of the cut surface, and the successive aggregations of the other kinds of gem- mules which come after in regular order. Also, the most ordinary processes of repair are similarly accounted for, and the successive development of similar parts and organs in creatures in which such complex evolutions occur is ex- plained in the same way, by the independent action of separate gemmules. In order that each living creature may be thus furnished, the number of such gemmules in each must be inconceiv- ably great. Mr. Darwin says : 3 "In a highly-organized and complex animal, the gemmules thrown off from each different cell or unit throughout the body must be incon- ceivably numerous and minute. Each unit of each part, as it changes during development — and we know that some insects undergo at least twenty metamorphoses — must throw off its gemmules. All organic beings, moreover, 1 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 403. 8 Ibid., p. 366. X.] PANGENESIS. 225 include many dormant gemmules derived from their grand- parents and more remote progenitors, but not from all their progenitors. These almost infinitely numerous and minute gemmules must be included in each bud, ovule, spermato- zoon, and pollen-grain." We have seen also that in certain cases, a similar multitude of gemmules must be included also in every considerable part of the whole body of each organism, but where are we to stop ? There must be gemmules, not only from every organ, but from every component part of such organ, from every subdivision of such component part, and from every cell, thread, or fibre, entering into the composition of such subdivision. More- over, not only from all these, but from each and every suc- cessive stage of the evolution and development of such successively more and more elementary parts. At the first glance this new atomic theory has charms from its apparent simplicity, but the attempt thus to follow it out into its ultimate limits and extreme consequences seems to indicate that it is at once insufficient and cumbrous. Mr. Darwin himself is, of course, fully aware that there must be some limit to this aggregation of gemmules. He says : s " Excessively minute and numerous as they are believed to be, an infinite number derived, during a long course of modification and descent, from each cell of each progenitor, could not be supported and nourished by the organism." But apart from these matters, which will be more fully considered further on, the hypothesis not only does not appear to account for certain phenomena which, in order to be a valid theory, it ought to account for ; but it seems absolutely to conflict with patent and notorious facts. How, for example, does it explain the peculiar repro- duction which is found to take place in certain marine w<5rms — certain annelids ? 8 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 402. 226 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. In sucn creatures we see that, from time to time, one of the segments of the body gradually becomes modified till it assumes the condition of a head and this remarkable phe- AN ANNELID DIVIDING SPONTANEOUSLY. (A new head having been formed toward the hinder end of the body of the parent.) nomenon is repeated again and again, the body of the worm thus multiplying serially into new individuals which succes- sively detach themselves from the older portion. The development of such a mode of reproduction by " Natural Selection " seems not less inexplicable than does its contin- ued performance through the aid of " pangenesis." For how can gemmules attach themselves to others to which they do not normally or generally succeed ? Scarcely less X.] PAXGEXESIS. 227 difficult to understand is the process of the stomach- carrying-off mode of metamorphosis before spoken of as existing in the .Echinoderms. Next, as to certain patent and notorious facts : On the hypothesis of pangenesis, no creature can develop an organ unless it possesses the component gemmules which serve for its formation. No creature can possess such gemmules unless it inherits them from its parents, grandparents, or its less remote ancestors. Now, the Jews are remarkably scrupulous as to marriage, and rarely contract such a union with individuals not of their own race. This practice has gone on for thousands of years, and similarly also for thousands of years the rite of circumcision has been unfailingly and carefully performed. If then the hypothesis of pangenesis is well founded, that rite ought to be now absolutely or nearly superfluous from the necessarily continuous absence of certain gemmules through so many centuries and so many generations. Yet it is not at all so, and this fact seems to amount almost to an experimental demonstration that the hypothesis of pangenesis is an insufficient explanation of individual evo- lution. Two exceedingly good criticisms of Mr. Darwin's hy- pothesis have appeared. One of these is by Mr. G. H. Lewes,* the .other by Prof. Delpino of Florence.5 The latter gentleman gives a report of an observation made by him upon a certain plant, which observation adds force to what has just been said about the Jewish race. He says : " " If we examine and compare the numerous species of the genus Salvia, commencing with Salvia officinalis, which may pass as the main state of the genus, and concluding 4 See Fortnightly Review, New Series, voL ill., April, 1868, p. 352. 5 This appeared in the Revista Contemporanea Nazionale Italiana, and was translated and given to the English public in Scientific Opinion for September 29, October 6, and October 13, 1869, pp. 365, 391, 407. 6 See Scientific Opinion, of October 13, 1869, p. 407. 22S THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. with /Salvia verticillata, which may be taken as the most highly-developed form, and as the most distant from the type, we observe a singular phenomenon. The lower cell of each of the two fertile anthers, which is much reduced and different from the superior even in Salvia officinalis, is transmuted in other salvice into an organ (nectarotheca) having a very different form and function, and finally dis- appears entirely in Salvia verticillata. "Now, on one occasion, in a flower belonging to an individual of Salvia verticillata^ and only on the left stamen, I observed a perfectly-developed and polliniferous lower cell, perfectly homologous with that which is normally developed in Salvia officinalis. This case of atavism is truly singular. According to the theory of Pangenesis, it is necessary to assume that all the gemmules of this anom- alous formation, and therefore the mother-gemmule of the cell, and the daughter-gemmules of the special epidermic tissue, and of the very singular subjacent tissue of the endothecium, have been perpetuated, and transmitted from parent to offspring in a dormant state, and through a number of generations, such as startles the imagination, and leads it to refuse its consent to the theory of Pangenesis, however seductive it may be." This seems a strong confir- mation of what has been here advanced. The main objection raised against Mr. Darwin's hy- pothesis is that it (Pangenesis) requires so many subordi- nate hypotheses for its support, and that some of these are not tenable. Professor Delpino considers 7 that as many as eight of these subordinate hypotheses are required; namely, that— " 1. The emission of the gemmules takes place, or may take place, in all states of the cell. 7 See Scientific Opinion, of September 29, 1869, p. 366 X.] PANGENESIS. 229 " 2. The quantity of gemmules emitted from every cell is very great. " 3. The minuteness of the gemmules is extreme. " 4. The gemmates possess two sorts of affinity, one of which might be called propagative, and the other germina- tive affinity. " 5. By means of the propagative affinity all the gemmules emitted by all the cells of the individual flow together and become condensed in the cells which compose the sexual organs, whether male or female (embryonal vesi- cle, cells of the embryo, pollen-grains, fovilla, antherozoids, spermatozoids), and likewise flow together and become con- densed in the cells which constitute the organs of a sexual or agamic reproduction (buds, spores, bulbilli, portions of the body separated by scission, etc.). " 6. By means of the germinative affinity, every gemmule (except in cases of anomalies or monstrosities) can be devel- oped only in cells homologous with the mother-cells of the cell from which they originated. In other words, the gem- mules from any cell can only be developed in unison with the cell preceding it in due order of succession, and while in a nascent state. " 7. Of each kind of gemmule a great number perishes ; a great number remains in a dormant state through many generations in the bodies of descendants; the remainder germinate and reproduce the mother-cell. " 8. Every gemmule may multiply itself by a process of scission into any number of equivalent gemmules." Mr. Darwin has published a short notice in reply to Prof. Delpino, in Scientific Opinion of October 20, 1869, p. 426. In this reply he admits the justice of Prof. Del- pino's attack, but objects to the alleged necessity of the first subordinate hypothesis, namely, that " the emission of gemmules takes place in all states of the cell." But if this is not the case, then a great part of the utility and dis- 230 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. tinction of pangenesis is destroyed; or, as Mr. Lewes justly says,8 " If gemmules produce whole cells, we have the very power which was pronounced mysterious in larger organisms." Mr. Darwin also does not see the force of the objection to the power of self-division which must be asserted of the gemmules themselves if Pangenesis be true. The objection, however, appears to many to be formidable. To admit the power of spontaneous division and multiplication in such rudimentary structures, seems a complete contradiction. The gemmules, by the hypothesis of Pangenesis, are the ultimate organized components of the body, the absolute organic atoms of which each body is composed ; how then can they be divisible ? Any part of a gemmule would be an impossible (because a less than possible) quantity. If it is divisible into still smaller organic wholes, as a germ-cell is, it must be made up, as the germ-cell is, of subordinate component atoms, which are then the true gemmules. This process may be repeated ad infinitum, unless we get to true organic atoms, the true gemmules, whatever they may be, and they necessarily will be incapable of any process of spontaneous fission. It is remarkable that Mr. Darwin brings forward in support of gemmule fission, the observa- tion that "Thuret has seen the zoospore of an alga divide itself, and both halves germinate." Yet on the hypothesis of Pangenesis, the zoospore of an alga must contain gem- mules from all the cells of the parent algas, and from all the parts of all their less remote ancestors in all their stages of existence. What wonder then that such an excessively complex body should divide and multiply ; and what parity is there between such a body and a gemmule ? A steam- engine and a steel-filing might equally well be compared together. Prof. Delpino makes a further objection which, how 8 Fortnightly Review, New Series, vol. iii., April, 1868, p. 508. X.] PANGENESIS. 231 ever, will only be of weight in the eyes of Vitalists. He says,9 Pangenesis is not to be received because " it leads directly to the negation of a specific vital principle, coor- dinating and regulating all the movements, acts, and func- tions of the individuals in which it is incarnated. For Pangenesis of the individual is a term without meaning. If, in contemplating an animal of high organization, we regard it purely as an aggregation of developed gemmules, although these gemmules have been evolved successively one after the other, and one within the other, notwith- standing they elude the conception of the real and true individual, these problematical and invisible gemmules must be regarded as so many individuals. Now, that real, true, living individuals exist in Nature, is a truth which is persistently attested to us by our consciousness. But how, then, can we explain that a great quantity of dissimilar elements, like the atoms of matter, can unite to form those perfect unities which we call individuals, if we do not sup- pose the existence of a specific principle, proper to the individual but foreign to the component atoms, which aggregates these said atoms, groups them into molecules, and then moulds the molecules into cells, the cells into tissues, the tissues into organs, and the organs into appa- ratus ? " " But, it may be urged in opposition by the Pangene- sists, your vital principle is an unknown and irresolute x. This is true ; but, on the other hand, let us see whether Pangenesis produces a clearer formula, and one free from unknown elements. The existence of the gemmules is a first unknown element ; the propagative affinity of the gem- mules is a second ; their germinative affinity is a third ; their multiplication by fission is a fourth — and what an unknown element ! " " Thus, in Pangenesis, every thing proceeds by force of 9 Scientific Opinion, of October 13, 1869, p. 408. 232 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. unknown elements, and we may ask whether it is more logical to prefer a system which assumes a multitude of unknown elements to a system which assumes only a single one?" Mr. Darwin appears, by " Natural Selection," tc destroy the reality of species, and by Pangenesis that of the indi- vidual. Mr. Lewes observes 10 of the individual that " this whole is only a subjective conception which summarizes the parts, and that in point of fact it is the parts which are re- produced." But the parts are also, from the same point of view, merely subjective until we come to the absolute or- ganic atoms. These atoms, on the other hand, are utterly invisible, intangible ; indeed, in the words of Mr. Darwin, inconceivable. Thus, then, it results from the theories in question, that the organic world is reduced to utter unreal- ity as regards all that can be perceived by the senses or distinctly imagined by the mind; while the only reality consists of the invisible, the insensible, the inconceivable. In other words, nothing is known that really is, and only the non-existent can be known. A somewhat paradoxical outcome of the speculations of those who profess to rely exclusively on the testimony of sense. " Les extremes se touchent" and extreme sensationalism shakes hands with the " das seyn ist das nichts " of Hegel. Altogether the hypothesis of Pangenesis seems to be little, if at all, superior to anterior hypotheses of a more or less similar nature. Apart from the atoms of Democritus, and apart also from the speculations of mediaeval writers, the molecules of Bonnet and of Buffon almost anticipated the hypothesis of Pangenesis. According to the last-named author,11 organic 10 Fortnightly Review, New Series, vol. iii., April, 1868, p. 509. 11 " Histoire Naturelle, generale et particuliere," tome ii., 1749, p. 327. " Ces liqueurs seminales sout toutes deux un extrait de toutes les parties du corps," etc. X.] PANGEXESIS. 233 particles from every part of the body assemble in the sex- ual secretions, and by their union build up the embryo, each particle taking its due place, and occupying in the off- spring a similar position to that which it occupied in the parents. In 1849, Prof. Owen, in his treatise on " Par- thenogenesis," put forward another conception. According to this, the cells resulting from the subdivision of the germ- cell preserve their developmental force, unless employed in building up definite organic structures. In certain crea- tures, and in certain parts of other creatures, germ-cells un- used are stored up, and by their agency lost limbs and other mutilations are repaired. Such unused products of the germ-cell are also supposed to become located in the gen- erative products. According to Mr. Herbert Spencer, in his " Principles of Biology," each living organism consists of certain so-called " physiological units." Each of these units has an innate power and capacity, by which it tends to build up and re- produce the entire organism of which it forms a part, unless in the mean time its force is exhausted by its taking part in the production of some distinct and definite tissue — a con- dition somewhat similar to that conceived by Prof. Owen. Now, at first sight, Mr. Darwin's atomic theory appears to be more simple than any of the others. It has been ob- jected that while Mr. Spencer's theory requires the assump- tion of an innate power and tendency in each physiological unit, Mr. Darwin's, on the other hand, requires nothing of the kind, but explains the evolution of each individual by purely mechanical conceptions. In fact, however, it is not so. Each gemmule, according to Mr. Darwin, is really the seat of powers, elective affinities, and special tendencies, as marked and mysterious as those possessed by the physiologi- cal unit of Mr. Spencer, with the single exception that the former has no tendency to build up the whole living, com- plex organism of which it forms a part. Some may think 234 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. this an important distinction, but it can hardly be so, for Mr. Darwin considers that his gemmule has the innate power and tendency to build up and transform itself into the whole living, complex cell of which it forms a part ; and the one tendency is, in principle, fully as difficult to under- stand, fully as mysterious, as is the other. The difference is but one of degree, not of kind. Moreover, the one mys- tery in the case of the " physiological unit " explains all, while with regard to the gemmule, as we have seen, it has to be supplemented by other powers and tendencies, each distinct, and each in itself inexplicable and profoundly mysterious. That there should be physiological units possessed of the power attributed to them, harmonizes with what has recently been put forward by Dr. H. Charlton Bastian ; who maintains that under fit conditions the simplest organisms develop themselves into relatively large and complex ones. This is not supposed by him to be due to any inheritance of ancestral gemmules, but to direct growth and transforma- tion of the most minute and the simplest organisms, which themselves, by all reason and analogy, owe their existence to immediate transformation from the inorganic world. Thus, then, there are grave difficulties in the way of the reception of the hypothesis of Pangenesis, which, moreover, if established, would leave the evolution of individual or- ganisms, when thoroughly analyzed, little if at all less mys- terious or really explicable than it is at present. As was said at the beginning of this chapter, " Pangen- esis " and " Natural Selection " are quite separable and distinct hypotheses. The fall of one of these by no means necessarily includes that of the other. Nevertheless, Mr. Darwin has associated them closely together, and, there- fore, the refutation of Pangenesis may render it advisable for those who have hitherto accepted " Natural Selection " to reconsider that theory. XI.] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 235 CHAPTER XL SPECIFIC GENESIS. Beview of the Statements and Arguments of Preceding Chapters. — Cumulative Argu- ment against Predominant Action of "Natural Selection."— Whether any thing positive as -well as negative can be enunciated.— Constancy of Laws of Nature does not necessarily imply Constancy of Specific Evolution. — Possible Exceptional Sta- bility of Existing Epoch.— Probability that an Internal Cau§e of Change exists.— Innate Powers must be conceived as existing somewhere or other.— Symbolism of Molecular Action under Vibrating Impulses. — Prof. Owen's Statement. — Statement of the Author's Yiew.— It avoids the Difficulties which oppose "Natural Selec- tion."—It harmonizes Apparently Conflicting Conceptions.— Summary and Con- clusion. HAVING now severally reviewed the principal biological facts which bear upon specific manifestation, it remains to sum up the results, and to endeavor to ascertain what, if any thing, can be said positively, as well as negatively, on this deeply interesting question. In the preceding chapters it has been contended, in the first place, that no mere survival of the fittest accidental and minute variations can account for the incipient stages of useful structures, such as, e. g., the heads of flat-fishes, the baleen of whales, vertebrate limbs, the laryngeal struct- ures of the new-born kangaroo, the pedicellariaB of Echin- oderms, or for many of the facts of mimicry, and especially those last touches of mimetic perfection, where an insect not only mimics a leaf, but one worm-eaten and attacked by fungi. Also, that structures like the hood of the cobra and the rattle of the rattlesnake seem to require another explana- tion. 236 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Again, it has been contended that instances of color, as in some apes ; of beauty, as in some shell-fish ; and of util- ity, as in many orchids, are examples of conditions which are quite beyond the power of Natural Selection to origi- nate and develop. Next, the peculiar mode of origin of the eye (by the simultaneous and concurrent modification of distinct parts), with the wonderful refinement of the human ear and voice, has been insisted on ; as also, that the importance of all these facts is intensified through the necessity (admitted by Mr. Darwin) that many individuals should be similarly and simultaneously modified in order that slightly favora- ble variations may hold their own in the struggle for life, against the overwhelming force and influence of mere number. Again, we have considered, in the third chapter, the great improbability that from minute variations in all di- rections alone and unaided, save by the survival of the fittest, closely-similar structures should independently arise ; though, on a non-Darwinian evolutionary hypothesis, their development might be expected a priori. We have seen, however, that there are many instances of wonderfully close similarity which are not due to genetic affinity ; the most notable instance, perhaps, being that brought for- ward by Mr. Murphy, namely, the appearance of the same eye-structure in the vertebrate and molluscous sub-king- doms. A curious resemblance, though less in degree, has also been seen to exist between the auditory organs of fishes and of Cephalopods. Remarkable similarities be- tween certain placental and implacental mammals, between the bird's-head processes of Polyzoa and the pedicellarias ef Echinoderms, between Ichthyosauria and Cetacea, with very many other similar coincidences, have also been pointed out. Evidence has also been brought forward to show that XI.] SPECIFIC GEXESIS. 237 similarity is sometimes directly induced by very obscure conditions, at present quite inexplicable, e. g., by causes immediately connected with geographical distribution ; as in the loss of the tail in certain forms of Lepidoptera and in simultaneous modifications of color in others, and in the direct modification of young English oysters, when trans- ported to the shore of the Mediterranean. Again, it has been asserted that certain groups of or- ganic forms seem to have an innate tendency to remark- able developments of some particular kind, as .beauty and singularity of plumage in the group of birds of paradise. It has also been contended that these is- something to be said in favor of sudden, as opposed to exceedingly minute and gradual modifications, even if the latter are not fortuitous. Cases were brought forward in Chapter IV., such as the bivalve just mentioned, twenty-seven kinds of American trees simultaneously and similarly modified, also the independent production of pony breeds, and the case of the English greyhounds in Mexico, the offspring of which produced directly acclimated progeny. Besides these, the case of the Normandy pigs, of Datura tatida, and also of the black-shouldered peacock, have been spoken of. The teeth of the labyrinthodon, the hand of the potto, the whalebone of whales, the wings of birds, the climbing tendrils of some plants, etc., have also been adduced as instances of structures, the origin and production of which are probably due rather to considerable modifications than to minute increments. It has also been shown that certain forms which were once supposed to be especially transitional and intermedi- ate (as, e. g., the aye-aye) are really by no means so ; while the general rule, that the progress of forms has been " from the more general to the more special," has been shown to present remarkable exceptions, as, e. g., Macrauchenia, the Glyptodon, and the sabre-toothed tiger (Machairodus). 238 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Next, as to specific stability, it has been seen that there may be a certain limit to normal variability, and that if changes take place they may be expected a priori to be marked and considerable ones, from the facts of the inor- ganic world, and perhaps also of the lowest forms of the organic world. It has also been seen that with regard to minute spontaneous variations in races, there is a rapidly- increasing difficulty in intensifying them, in any one di- rection, by ever such careful breeding. Moreover, it has appeared that different species show a tendency to varia- bility in special directions, and probably in different de- grees, and that at any rate Mr. Darwin himself concedes the existence of an internal barrier to change when he credits the goose with " a singularly inflexible organiza- tion ; " also, that he admits the presence of an internal pro- clivity to change when he speaks of " a whole organization seeming to have become plastic, and tending to depart from the parental type." We have seen also that a marked tendency to reversion does exist, inasmuch as it sometimes takes place in a striking manner, as exemplified in the white silk fowl in England, in spite of careful selection in breeding. Again, we have seen that a tendency exists in nature to eliminate hybrid races, by whatever means that elimi- nation is effected, while no similar tendency bars the way to an indefinite blending of varieties. This has also been enforced by statements as to the prepotency of certain pol- len of identical species, but of distinct races. To all the preceding considerations have been added others derived from the relations of species to past time. It has been contended that we have as yet no evidence of minutely intermediate forms connecting uninterruptedly together undoubtedly distinct species. That while even " horse ancestry " fails to supply such a desideratum, in very strongly-marked and exceptional kinds (such as the Ichthy- XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 239 osauria, Chelonia, and Anoura), the absence of links is very important and significant. For if every species, with- out exception, has arisen by minute modifications, it seems incredible that a small percentage of such transitional forms should not have been preserved. This, of course, is espe- cially the case as regards the marine Ichthyosauria and Ple- siosauria, of which such numbers of remains have been dis- covered. Sir William Thomson's great authority has been seen to oppose itself to " Natural Selection," by limiting, on astro- nomical and physical grounds, the duration of life on this planet to about one hundred million years. This period, it has been contended, is not nearly enough, on the one hand, for the evolution of all organic forms by the exclusive action of mere minute, fortuitous variations ; on the other hand, for the deposition of all the strata which must have been deposited, if minute fortuitous variation was the manner of successive specific manifestation. Again, the geographical distribution of existing animals has been seen to present difficulties which, though not themselves insurmountable, yet have a certain weight when taken in conjunction with all the other objections. The facts of homology, serial, bilateral, and vertical, have also been passed hi review. Such facts, it has been con- tended, are not explicable without admitting the action of what may most conveniently be spoken of as an internal power, the existence of which is supported by facts not only of comparative anatomy but of teratology and pathology also. " Natural Selection " also has been shown to be im- potent to explain these phenomena, while the existence of such an internal power of homologous evolution diminishes the a priori improbability of an analogous law of specific origination. All these various considerations have been supplemented by an endeavor to show the utter inadequacy of Mr. Dar- 240 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. win's theory with regard to the higher psychical phenomena of man (especially the evolution of moral conceptions), and with regard to the evolution of individual organisms by the action of Pangenesis. And it was implied that if Mr. Darwin's latter hypothesis can be shown to be untenable, an antecedent doubt is thus thrown upon his other concep- tion, namely, the theory of " Natural Selection." A cumulative argument thus arises against the preva- lent action of " Natural Selection," which, to the mind of the author, is conclusive. As before observed, he was not originally disposed to reject Mr. Darwin's fascinating theory. Reiterated endeavors to solve its difficulties have, however, had the effect of convincing him that that theory as the one or as the leading explanation of the successive evolution and manifestation of specific forms is untenable. At the same time he admits fully that " Natural Selection " acts and must act, and that it plays in the organic world a cer- tain though a secondary and subordinate part. The one modus operandi yet suggested having been found insufficient, the question arises, Can another be substi- tuted in its place ? If not, can any thing that is positive, and if any thing, what, be said as to the question of specific origination ? Now, in the first place, it is of course axiomatic that the laws which conditioned the evolution of extinct and of ex- isting species are of as much efficacy at this moment as at any preceding period, that they tend to the manifestation of new forms as much now as ever before. It by no means necessarily follows, however, that this tendency is actually being carried into effect, and that new species of the higher animals and plants are actually now produced. They may be so or they may not, according as existing circumstances favor, or conflict with, the action of those laws. It is possible that lowly-organized creatures may be contin- ually evolved at the present day, the requisite conditions XI.] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 241 being more or less easily supplied. There is, however, no similar evidence at present as to higher forms ; while, as we have seen in Chapter VII., there are a priori con- siderations which militate against their being similarly evolved. The presence of wild varieties and the difficulty which often exists in the determination of species are sometimes adduced as arguments that high forms are now in process of evolution. These facts, however, do not necessarily prove more than that some species possess a greater varia- bility than others, and (what is indeed unquestionable) that species have often been unduly multiplied by geologists and botanists. It may be, for example, that Wagner was right, and that all the American monkeys of the genus Cebus may be reduced to a single species or to two. With regard to the lower organisms, and supposing views recently advanced to become fully established, there is no reason to think that the forms said to be evolved were new species, but rather reappearances of .definite kinds which had appeared before and will appear again under the same conditions. In the same way, with higher forms simi- lar conditions must educe similar results, but here practically similar conditions can rarely obtain because of the large part which " descent " and " inheritance " always play in such highly-organized forms. Still it is conceivable that different combinations at different times may have occasionally the same outcome, just as the multiplications of different numbers may have sever- ally the same result. There are reasons, however, for thinking it possible that the human race is a witness of an exceptionally unchanging and stable condition of things, if the calculations of Mr. Croll are valid as to how far variations in the eccentricity in the earth's orbit together with the precession of the equinoxes have produced changes in climate. Mr. Wallace has pointed 11 242 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. out x that the last 60,000 years having been exceptionally unchanging as regards these conditions, specific evolution may have been exceptionally rare. It becomes, then, pos- sible to suppose that for a similar period stimuli to change in the manifestation of animal forms may have been exception- ally few and feeble — that is, if the conditions of the earth's orbit have been as exceptional as stated. However, even if new species are actually now being evolved as actively as ever, or if they have been so quite recently, no conflict thence necessarily arises with the view here advocated. For it by no means follows that if some examples, of new species have recently been suddenly produced from individ- uals of antecedent species, we ought to be able to put our fingers on such cases ; as Mr. Murphy well observes 2 in a passage before quoted, " If a species were to come suddenly into being in the wild state, as the Ancon sheep did under domestication, how could we ascertain the fact? If the first of a newly-born species were found, the fact of its dis- covery would tell nothing about its origin. Naturalists would register it as a very rare species, having been only once met with, but they would have no means of knowing whether it were the first or last of its race." But are there any grounds for thinking that in the gen esis of species an internal force or tendency interferes, co- operates with, and controls the action of external con- ditions ? It is here contended that there are such grounds, and that though inheritance, reversion, atavism, Natural Selec- tion, etc., play a part not unimportant, yet that such an 1 See Nature, March 3, 1870, p. 454. Mr. Wallace says (referring to Mr. Croll's paper in the Phil. Mag.}, " As we are now, and have been for 60,000 years, in a period of low eccentricity, the rate of change of species during that time may be no measure of the rate that has generally obtained in past geological epocJis" 2 " Habit and Intelligence," vol. i., p. 344. XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 243 internal power is a great, perhaps the main, determining agent. It will, however, be replied that such an entity is no vera causa ; that if the conception is accepted, it is no real explanation ; and that it is merely a roundabout way of saying that the facts are as they are, while the cause re- mains unknown. To this it may be rejoined that for all who believe in the existence of the abstraction " force " at all, other than will, this conception of an internal force must be accepted and located somewhere — cannot be elim- inated altogether ; and that therefore it may as reasona- bly be accepted in this mode as in any other. It was urged at the end of the third chapter that it is congruous to credit mineral species with an internal power or force. By such a power it may be conceived that crys- tals not only assume their external symmetry, but even repair it when injured. Ultimate chemical elements must also be conceived as possessing an innate tendency to form certain unions, and to cohere in stable aggregations. This was considered toward the end of Chapter VIII. Turning to the organic world, even on the hypothesis of Mr. Herbert Spencer or that of Mr. Darwin, it is impos- sible to escape the conception of innate internal forces. With regard to the physiological units of the former, Mr. Spencer himself, as we have seen, distinctly attributes to them " an innate tendency " to evolve the parent-form from wliich they sprang. With regard to the gemmules of Mr. Darwin, we have seen, in Chapter X., with how many innate powers, tendencies, and capabilities, they must each be severally endowed, to reproduce their kind, to evolve complex organisms or cells, to exercise germinative affin- ity, etc. If then (as was before said at the end of Chapter VIII.) such innate powers must be attributed to chemical atoms, to mineral species, to gemmules, and to physiological units, 244 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. it is only reasonable to attribute such to each individual organism. The conception of such internal and latent capabilities is somewhat like that of Mr. Galton, before mentioned, ac- cording to which the organic world consists of entities, each of which is, as it were, a spheroid with many facets on its surface, upon one of which it reposes in stable equi- librium. When by the accumulated action of incident forces this equilibrium is disturbed, the spheroid is sup- posed to turn over until it settles on an adjacent facet once more in stable equilibrium. The internal tendency of an organism to certain consid- erable and definite changes would correspond to the facets on the surface of the spheroid. It may be objected that we have no knowledge as to how terrestrial, cosmical, and other forces, can affect organ- isms so as to stimulate and evolve these latent, merely po tential forms. But we have had evidence that such myste- rious agencies do affect organisms in ways as yet inexpli- cable, in the very remarkable effects of geographical condi- tions which were" detailed in the third chapter. It is quite conceivable that the material organic world may be so constituted that the simultaneous action upon it of all known forces, mechanical, physical, chemical, mag- netic, terrestrial, and cosmical, together with other as yet unknown forces which probably exist, may result in changes which are harmonious and symmetrical, just as the internal nature of vibrating plates causes particles of sand scattered over them to assume definite and symmetrical figures when made to oscillate in different ways by the bow of a violin being drawn along their edges. The results of these com- bined internal powers and external influences might be rep- resented under the symbol of complex series of vibrations (analogous to those of sound or light) forming a most com- plex harmony or a display of most varied colors. In such XI.] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 245 a way the reparation of local injuries might be symbolized as a filling up and completion of an interrupted rhythm. Thus also monstrous aberrations from typical structure might correspond to a discord, and sterility from crossing be compared with the darkness resulting from the interfer- ence of waves of light. Such symbolism will harmonize with the peculiar repro- duction, before mentioned, of heads in the body of certain annelids, with the facts of serial homology, as well as those of bilateral and vertical symmetry. Also, as the atoms of a resonant body may be made to give out sound by the juxtaposition of a vibrating tuning-fork, so it is conceivable that the physiological units of a living organism may be so influenced by surrounding conditions (organic and other) that the accumulation of these conditions may upset the previous rhythm of such units, producing modifications in them — a fresh chord in the harmony of Nature — a new species ! But it may be again objected that to say that species arise by the help of an innate power possessed by organ- isms is no explanation, but is a reproduction of the ab- surdity, 1? opium endormit parceqi? il a une vertu soporifique. It is contended, however, that this objection does not ap- ply, even if it be conceded that there is that force in Mo- liere's ridicule which is generally attributed to it.8 Much, however, might be said in opposition to more than one of that brilliant dramatist's smart philosophical epigrams, just as to the theological ones of Voltaire, or to the biological one of that other Frenchman who for a time discredited 3 If any one were to contend that beside the opium there existed a real distinct objective entity, " its soporific virtue," he would be open to ridicule indeed. But the constitution of our minds is such that we can- not but distinguish ideally a thing from its even essential attributes and qualities. The joke is sufficiently amusing, however, regarded as the solemn enunciation of a mere truism. 246 THE GENESIS OF SPEuiES. [CHAP. a cranial skeletal theory by the phrase " Vertebre pen- sante." 4 In fact, however, it is a real explanation of how a man lives to say that he lives independently, on his own income, instead of being supported by his relatives and friends. In the same way, there is fully as real a distinction between the production of new specific manifestations entirely ab externo, and by the production of the same through an in- nate force and tendency, the determination of which into action is occasioned by external circumstances. To say that organisms possess this innate power, and that by it new species are from time to time produced, is by no means a mere assertion that they are produced, and in an unknown mode. It is the negation of that view which deems external forces alone sufficient, and at the same time the assertion of something positive, to be arrived at by the process of reductio ad absurdum. All physical explanations result ultimately in such con- ceptions of innate power, or else in that of will-force. The far-famed explanation of the celestial motions ends in the conception that every particle of matter has the innate power of attracting every other particle directly as the mass, and inversely as the square of the distance. We are logically driven to this positive conception if we do not accept the view that there is no force but voli- tion, and that all phenomena whatever are the immediate results of the action of intelligent and self-conscious will. We have seen that the notion of sudden changes — salta- tory actions in Nature — has received countenance from Prof. Huxley.5 We must conceive that these jumps are orderly, and according to law, inasmuch as the whole cos- 4 Noticed by Prof. Owen in his " Archetype," p. 76. Recently it has been attempted to discredit Darwinism in France by speaking of it as " de la science mousseuse ! " 6 " Lay Sermons," p. 342. XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 247 mos is such. Such orderly evolution harmonizes with a teleology derived, not indeed from external Nature directly, but from the mind of man. On this point, however, more will be said in the next chapter. But, once more, if new species are not manifested by the action of external condi- tions upon minute indefinite individual differences, in what precise way mry we conceive that manifestation to have taken place ? Are new species now evolving, as they have been from time to time evolved ? If so, in what way and by what conceivable means ? In the first place, they must be produced by natural ac- tion in preexisting material, or by supernatural action. For reasons to be given in the next chapter, the second hypothesis need not be considered. If, then, new species are and have been evolved from preexisting material, must that material have been organic or inorganic ? As before said, additional arguments have lately been brought forward to show that individual organisms do arise from a basis of in-organic material only. As, however, this at the most appears to be the case, if at all, only with the lowest and most minute organisms exclusively, the process cannot be observed, though it may perhaps be fairly in- ferred. AVe may therefore, if for no other reason, dismiss the notion that highly-organized animals and plants can be sud- denly or gradually built up by any combination of physical forces and natural powers acting externally and internally upon and in merely inorganic material as a base. But the question is, How have the highest kinds of ani- mals and plants arisen ? It seems impossible that they can have appeared otherwise than by the agency of antecedent organisms not greatly different from them. A multitude of facts, ever increasing in number and im- 248 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. portance, all point to such a mode of specific manifesta- tion. One very good example has been adduced by Prof. Flower in the introductory lecture of his first Hunterian Course.6 It is the reduction in size, to a greater or less degree, of the second and third digits of the foot in Aus- tralian marsupials, and this, in spite of the very different form and function of the foot in different groups of those animals. A similarly significant evidence of relationship is af- forded by processes of the zygomatic region of the skull in certain edentates existing and extinct. Again, the relation between existing and recent faunas of the different regions of the world, and the predominating (though by no means exclusive) march of organization, from the more general to the more special point in the same direction. Almost all the facts brought forward by the patient industry of Mr. Darwin in support of his theory of " Natu- ral Selection," are of course available as evidence in favor of the agency of preexisting and similar animals in specific evolution. Now. the new forms must be produced by changes tak- ing place in organisms in, after, or before their birth, either in their embryonic, or toward or in their adult, condition. Examples of strange births are sufficiently common, and they may arise either from direct embryonic modifications or apparently from some obscure change in the parental action. To the former category belong the hosts of in- stances of malformation through arrest of development, and perhaps generally monstrosities of some sort are the result of such affections of the embryo. To the second category belong all cases of hybridism, of cross-breed, and in all prob- 6 Introductory Lecture of February 14, 1870, pp. 24-30, Figs. 1-4. (Churchill & Sons.) XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 249 ability the new varieties and forms, such as the memorable one of the black-shouldered peacock. In all these cases we do not have abortions or monstrosities, but more or less har- monious forms, often of great functional activity, endowed with marked viability and generative prepotency, except in the case of hybrids, when we often find even a more marked generative impotency. It seems probable therefore that new species may arise from some constitutional affection of parental forms — an affection mainly, if not exclusively, of their generative sys- tem. Mr. Darwin has carefully collected7 numerous in- stances to show how excessively sensitive to various influ- ences this system is. He says : 8 " Sterility is independent of general health, and is often accompanied by excess of size, or great luxuriance," and, " No one can tell, till he tries, whether any particular animal will breed under confinement, or any exotic plant seed freely under culture." Again, " When a new character arises, whatever its nature may be, it generally tends to be inherited, at least in a temporary, and sometimes in a most persistent manner." 8 Yet the obscure action of conditions will alter characters long inher- ited, as the grandchildren of Aylesbury ducks removed to a distant part of England, completely lost their early habit of incubation, and hatched their eggs at the same time with the common ducks of the same place." 10 Mr. Darwin quotes Mr. Bartlett as saying : " It is remark- able that lions breed more freely in travelling collections than in the zoological gardens ; probably the constant ex- citement and irritation produced by moving from place to place, or change of air, may have considerable influence in the matter." " 7 See especially " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., chap, xviii. 8 " Origin of Species," 5th edit., pp. 323, 324. 9 " Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 2. 10 Ibid., p. 25. 1J Ibid., p. 151. 250 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. Mr. Darwin also says : " There is reason to believe that insects are affected by confinement like the higher animals," and he gives examples.12 Again, he gives examples of change of plumage in the linnet, bunting, oriole, and other birds, and of the tempo- rary modification of the horns of a male deer during a voyage.13 Finally, he adds that these changes cannot be attributed to loss of health or vigor, " when we reflect how healthy, long-lived, and vigorous many animals are under captivity, such as parrots, and hawks when used for hawking, chetahs when used for hunting, and elephants. The reproductive organs themselves are not diseased ; and the diseases from which animals in menageries usually perish, are not those which in any way affect their fertility. No domestic ani- mal is more subject to disease than the sheep, yet it is remarkably prolific. . . .It would appear that any change in the habits of life, whatever these habits may be, if great enough, tends to affect in an inexplicable manner the pow- ers of reproduction." Such, then, is the singular sensitiveness of the genera- tive system. As to the means by which that system is affected, we see that a variety of conditions affect it ; but as to the modes in which they act upon it, we have as yet little if any clew. We have also seen the singular effects (in tailed Lepi- doptera, etc.) of causes connected with geographical distri- bution, the mode of action of which is as yet quite inexpli- cable; and we have also seen the' innate tendency which there appears to be in certain groups (birds of paradise, etc.) to develop peculiarities of a special kind. It is, to say the least, probable that other influences exist, terrestrial and cosmical, as yet unnoted. The grad- 12 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 157. 13 Ibid., p. 158. XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 251 ually accumulating or diversely combining actions of all these on" highly-sensitive structures, which are themselves possessed of internal responsive powers and tendencies, may well result in occasional repeated productions of forms harmonious and vigorous, and differing from the parental forms in proportion to the result of the combining or con- flicting action of all external and internal influences. If, in the past history of this planet, more causes ever intervened, or intervened more energetically than at pres- ent, we might a priori expect a richer and more various evolution of forms more radically differing than any which could be produced under conditions of more perfect equi- librium. At the same time, if it be true that the last few thousand years have been a period of remarkable and exceptional uniformity as regards this planet's astronomical relations, there are then some grounds for thinking that organic evolution may have been exceptionally depressed during the same epoch. Now, as to the fact that sudden changes and sudden developments have occurred, and as to the probability that such changes are likely to occur, evidence was given in Chapter IV. In Chapter V. we also saw that minerals become modi- fied suddenly and considerably by the action of incident forces — as, e. g., the production of hexagonal tabular crys- tals of carbonate of copper by sulphuric acid, and of long rectangular prisms by ammonia, etc. "We have thus a certain antecedent probability that if changes are produced in specific manifestation through inci- dent forces, these changes will be sensible and considerable, not minute and infinitesimal. Consequently, it is probable that new species have appeared from time to time with comparative suddenness, and that they still continue so to arise if all the conditions necessary for specific evolution now obtain. 252 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. This probability will be increased if the observations of Dr. Bastian are confirmed by future investigation. Ac- cording to his report, when the requisite conditions were supplied, the transformations \vhich appeared to take place (from very low to higher organisms) were sudden, definite, and complete. Therefore, if this is so, there must probably exist in higher forms a similar tendency to such change. That tendency may indeed be long suppressed, and ultimately modified by the action of heredity — an action which would increase in force with the increase in the perfection and complexity of the organism affected. Still we might expect that such changes as do take place would be also sudden, definite, and complete. Moreover, as the same causes produce the same effects, several individual parent-forms must often have been simi- larly and simultaneously affected. That they should be so affected — at least that several similarly-modified individuals should simultaneously arise — has been seen to be a generally necessary circumstance for the permanent duration of such new modifications. It is also conceivable that such new forms may be en- dowed with excessive constitutional strength and viability, and with generative prepotency, as was the case with the black-shouldered peacock in Sir J. Trevelyan's flock. This flock was entirely composed of the common kind, and yet the new form rapidly developed itself, " to the extinction of the previously-existing breed" : Indeed, the notion accepted by both Mr. Darwin and Mr. Herbert Spencer, and which is plainly the fact (namely, that changes of conditions and incident forces, within limits, augment the viability and fertility of individuals), harmon- izes well with the suggested possibility as to an augmented viability and prepotency in new organic forms evolved by 14 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. i. p. 291. XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 253 peculiar consentaneous actions of conditions and forces, both external and internal. The remarkable series of changes noted by Dr. Bastian were certainly not produced by external incident forces, only, but by these acting on a peculiar materia, having special properties and powers. Therefore, the changes were in- duced by the consentaneous action of internal and external forces.16 In the same way, then, we may expect changes in higher forms to be evolved by similar united action of inter- nal and external forces. One other point may here be alluded to. When the re- markable way in which structure and function simultaneously change, is borne in mind ; when those numerous instances in which Nature has supplied similar wants by similar means, as detailed in Chapter III., are remembered ; when also all the wonderful contrivances of orchids, of mimicry, and the strange complexity of certain instinctive actions are consid- ered— then the conviction forces itself on many minds that the organic world is the expression of an intelligence of some kind. This view has been well advocated by Mr. Joseph John Murphy, in his recent work so often here re- ferred to. This intelligence, however, is evidently not altogether such as ours, or else has other ends in view than those most obvious to us. For the end is often attained in singularly roundabout ways, or with a prodigality of means which seems out of all proportion with the result : not with the simple action directed to one end which generally marks human activity. Organic Nature then speaks clearly to many minds of the action of an intelligence resulting, on the whole and. in the main, in order, harmony, and beauty, yet of an intelligence the ways of which are not such as ours. 15 Though hardly necessary, it may be well to remark that the views here advocated in no way depend upon the truth of the doctrine of Spon- taneous Generation. 254 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. This view of evolution harmonizes well with theistic con- ceptions ; not, of course, that this harmony is brought for- ward as an argument in its favor generally, but it will have weight with those who are convinced that Theism reposes upon solid grounds of reason as the rational view of the uni- verse. To such it may be observed that, thus conceived, the Divine action has that slight amount of resemblance to, and that wide amount of divergence from, what human action would be, which might be expected a priori — might be expected, that is, from a Being whose nature and aims are utterly beyond our power to imagine, however faintly, but whose truth and goodness are the fountain and source of our own perceptions of such qualities. The view, of evolution maintained in this work, though arrived at in complete independence, yet seems to agree in many respects with the views advocated by Prof. Owen in the last volume of his " Anatomy of Vertebrates," under the term " derivation." He says : 16 " Derivation holds that every species changes in time, by virtue of inherent tenden- cies thereto. c Natural Selection ' holds that no such change can take place without the influence of altered external circumstances." * Derivation ' sees among the effects of the innate tendency to change irrespective of altered circum- stances, a manifestation of creative power in the variety and beauty of the results ; and, in the ultimate forthcoming of a being susceptible of appreciating such beauty, evidence of the preordaining of such relation of power to the appre- ciation. c Natural Selection ' acknowledges that if ornament or beauty, in itself, should be a purpose in creation, it would be absolutely fatal to it as a hypothesis." " l Natural Selection ' sees grandeur in the view of life, 16 Vol. Hi., p. 808. 17 This is hardly an exact representation of Mr. Darwin's view. On his theory, if a favorable variation happens to arise (the external ciicum- stances remaining the same), it will yet be preserved. XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 255 with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one. * Derivation' sees therein a narrow invocation of a special miracle and an un- worthy limitation of creative power, the grandeur of which is manifested daily, hourly, in calling into life many forms, by conversion of physical and chemical into vital modes of force, under as many diversified conditions of the requisite elements to be so combined." The view propounded in this work allows, however, a greater and more important part to the share of external influences, it being believed by the author, however, that these external influences equally with the internal ones are the results of one harmonious action underlying the whole of Nature, organic and inorganic, cosmical, physical, chemi- cal, terrestrial, vital, and social. According to this view, an internal law presides over the actions of every part of every individual, and of every organism as a unit, and of the entire organic world as a whole. It is believed that this conception of an internal innate force will ever remain necessary, however much its subordinate processes and actions may become explicable : That by such a force, from time to time, new species are manifested by ordinary generation just as Pavo nigripennis appeared suddenly, these new forms not being monstrosities but harmonious self-consistent wholes. That thus, as spe- cific distinctness is manifested by obscure sexual conditions, so in obscure sexual modifications specific distinctions arise. That these "jumps" are considerable in comparison with the minute variations of " Natural Selection " — are in fact sensible steps, such as discriminate species from spe- cies. That the latent tendency which exists to these sudden evolutions is determined to action by the stimulus of exter- nal conditions. That " Natural Selection " rigorously destroys mon- 256 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. strosities, and abortive and feeble attempts at the perform- ance of the evolutionary process. That " Natural Selection " removes the antecedent spe- cies rapidly when the new one evolved is more in harmony with surrounding conditions. That " Natural Selection " favors and develops useful variations, though it is impotent to originate them or. to erect the physiological barrier which seems to exist between species. By some such conception as this, the difficulties here enumerated, which beset the theory of " Natural Selection " pure and simple, are to be got over. Thus, for example, the difficulties discussed in the first chapter — namely, those as to the origins and first begin- nings of certain structures — are completely evaded. Again, as to the independent origin of closely-similar structures, such as the eyes of the Vertebrata and cuttle- fishes, the difficulty is removed if we may adopt the concep- tion of an innate force similarly directed in each case, and assisted by favorable external conditions. Specific stability, limitation to variability, and the facts of reversion, all harmonize with the view here put forward. The same may be said with regard to the significant facts of homology, and of organic symmetry ; and our consider- ation of the hypothesis of Pangenesis in Chapter X., has seemed to result in a view as to innate powers which accords well with what is here advocated. The evolutionary hypothesis here advocated also serves to explain all those remarkable facts which were stated in the first chapter to be explicable by the theory of Natural Selection, namely, the relation of existing to recent faunas and floras ; the phenomena of homology and of rudimentary structures; also the processes gone through in develop- ment ; and lastly, the wonderful facts of mimicry. Finally, the view adopted is the synthesis of many dis- XL] SPECIFIC GENESIS. 257 tinct and, at first sight, conflicting conceptions, each of which contains elements of truth, and all of which it ap- pears to be able more or less to harmonize. Thus it has been seen that " Natural Selection " is ac- cepted. It acts and must act, though alone it does not appear capable of fulfilling the task assigned to it by Mr. Darwin. Pangenesis has probably also much truth in it, and has certainly afforded valuable and pregnant suggestions, but unaided and alone it seems inadequate to explain the evo- lution of the individual organism. Those three conceptions of the organic world which may be spoken of as the teleological, the typical, and the transmutationist, have often been regarded as mutually an- tagonistic and conflicting. The genesis of species as here conceived, however, ac- cepts, locates, and harmonizes all the three. Teleology concerns the ends for which organisms were designed. The recognition, therefore, that their formation took place by an evolution not fortuitous, in no way invali- dates the acknowledgment of their final causes if on other grounds there are reasons for believing that such final causes exist. Conformity to type, or the creation of species according to certain " divine ideas," is in no way interfered with by such a 'process of evolution as is here advocated. Such " divine ideas " must be accepted or declined upon quite other grounds than the mode of their realization, and of their manifestation in the world of sensible phenomena. Transmutationism (an old name for the evolutionary hy- pothesis), which was conceived at one time to be the very antithesis to the two preceding conceptions, harmonizes well with them if the evolution be conceived to be orderly and designed. It will in the next chapter be shown to be completely in harmony with conceptions, upon the accept- 258 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. ance of which " final causes " and " divine ideal archetypes " . alike depend. Thus then, if the cumulative argument put forward in this book is valid, we must admit the insufficiency of " Nat- ural Selection " both on account of the residuary phenomena it fails to explain, and on account of certain other phenom- ena which seem actually to conflict with that theory. We have seen that though the laws of Nature are constant, yet some of the conditions which determine specific change may be exceptionally absent at the present epoch of the world's history ; also that it is not only possible, but highly probable, that an internal power or tendency is an important if not the main agent in evoking the manifestation of new species on the scene of realized existence, and that in any case, from the facts of homology, innate internal powers to the full as mysterious must anyhow be accepted, whether they act in specific origination or not. Besides all this, we have seen that it is probable that the action of this innate power is stimulated, evoked, and determined by external condi- tions, and also that the same external conditions, in the shape of " Natural Selection," play an important part in the evolutionary process : and finally, it has been affirmed that the view here advocated, while it is supported by the facts on which Darwinism rests, is not open to the objections and difficulties which oppose themselves to the reception of " Natural Selection," as the exclusive or even as the main agent in the successive and orderly evolution of or- ganic forms in the genesis of species. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 259 CHAPTER XII. THEOLOGY AXD EVOLUTION. Prejudiced Opinions on the Subject. — " Creation " sometimes denied from Prejudice. — The Unknowable. — Mr. Herbert Spencer's Objections to Theism; to Creation. — Meanings of Term " Creation."— Confusion from not distinguishing between " Pri- mary" and "Derivative" Creation.— Mr. Darwin's Objections.— Bearing of Chris- tianity on the Theory of Evolution. — Supposed Opposition, the Result of a Miscon- ception.— Theological Authority not opposed to Evolution. — St. Augustine. — St. Thomas Aquinas.— Certain Consequences of Want of Flexibility of Mind.— Reason and Imagination. — The First Cause and Demonstration. — Parallel between Chris- tianity and Natural Theology.— "What Evolution of Species is.— Prof. Agassiz.— In- nate Powers must be recognized.— Bearing of Evolution on Religious Belief.— Prof. Huxley.— Prof. Owen.— Mr. Wallace.— Mr. Darwin.— A priori, Conception of Di- vine Action. — Origin of Man. — Absolute Creation and Dogma. — Mr. "Wallace's Yiew. —A Supernatural Origin for Man's Body not necessary.— Two Orders of Being in Man. — Two Modes of Origin. — Harmony of the Physical, Hyperphysical, and Super- natural.— Reconciliation of Science and Religion as regards Evolution. — Conclusion THE special " Darwinian Theory " and that of an evolu- tionary process neither excessively minute nor fortuitous, having now been considered, it is time to turn to the im- portant question, whether both or either of these concep- tions may have any bearing, and if any, what, upon Chris- tian belief. Some readers will consider such an inquiry to be a work of supererogation. Seeing clearly themselves the absurdity of prevalent popular views, and the shallowness of popular objections, they may be impatient of any discussion on the subject. But it is submitted that there are many minds worthy of the highest esteem and of every consideration, which have regarded the subject hitherto almost exclusive- ly from one point of view ; that there are some persons who 260 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. are opposed to the progress (in their own minds or in that of their children or dependants) of physical scientific truth — the natural revelation — through a mistaken estimate of its religious bearings, while there are others who are zeal- ous in its promotion from a precisely similar error. For the sake of both these, then, the author may perhaps be pardoned for entering slightly on very elementary matters relating to the question whether evolution or Darwinism has any, and if any, what, bearing on theology. There are at least two classes of men who will certainly assert that they have a very important and highly-signifi- cant bearing upon it. One of these classes consists of persons zealous for reli gion indeed, but who identify orthodoxy with their own private interpretation of Scripture or with narrow opinions in which they have been brought up — opinions doubtless widely spread, but at the same time destitute of any dis- tinct and authoritative sanction on the part of the Chris- tian Church. The other class is made up of men hostile to religion, and who are glad to make use of any and every argument which they think may possibly be available against it. Some individuals within this latter class may not be- lieve in the existence of God, but may yet abstain from publicly avowing this absence of belief, contenting them- selves with denials of " creation " and " design," though these denials are really consequences of their attitude of mind respecting the most important and fundamental of all beliefs. Without a distinct belief in a personal God it is impos- sible to have any religion worthy of the name, and no one can at the same time accept the Christian religion and deny the dogma of creation. " I believe in God," " the Creator of Heaven and Earth," the very first clauses of the Apostles' Creed, for- XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 261 mally commit those who accept them to the assertion of this belief. If, therefore, any theory of physical science really conflicts with such an authoritative statement, its importance to Christians is unquestionable. As, however, " creation " forms a part of " revelation," and as " revelation " appeals for its acceptance to " reason," which has to prepare a basis for it by an intelligent accept- ance of theism on purely rational grounds, it is necessary to start with a few words as to the reasonableness of belief in God, which indeed are less superfluous than some read- ers may perhaps imagine ; " a few words," because this is not the place where the argument can be drawn out, but only one or two hints given in reply to certain modern objections. No better example perhaps can be taken, as a type of these objections, than a passage in Mr. Herbert Spencer's " First Principles." 1 This author constantly speaks of the " ultimate cause of things " as " the unknowable," a term singularly unfortunate, and, as Mr. James Martineau has pointed out,3 even self-contradictory : for that entity, the 1 See 2d edit., p. 113. 8 " Essays, Philosophical and Theological," Triibner & Co., First Se- ries, 1866, p. 190. " Every relative disability may be read two ways. A disqualification in the nature of thought for knowing x is, from the other side, a disqualification in the nature of x from being known. To say, theo, that the First Cause is wholly removed from our apprehension is not simply a disclaimer of faculty on our part : it is a charge of in- ability against the First Cause too. The dictum about it is this : * It is a Being that may exist out of knowledge, but that is precluded from en- tering within the sphere of knowledge.' We are told in one breath that this Being must be in every sense ' perfect, complete, total — including in itself all power, and transcending all law ' (p. 38) ; and in another that this perfect omnipotent One is totally incapable of revealing any one of an infinite store of attributes. Need we point out the contradictions which this position Involves ? If you abide by it, you deny the Absolute and Infinite in the very act of aflBrming it, for, in debarring the First Cause from self-revelation, you impose a limit on its nature. And, in the 262 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP knowledge of the existence of which presses itself ever more and more upon the cultivated intellect, cannot be the unknown, still less the unknowable, because we certainly know it, in that we know for certain that it exists. Nay more, to predicate incognoscibility of it, is even a certain knowledge of the mode of its existence. Mr. H. Spencer says : 3 " The consciousness of an Inscrutable Power mani- fested to us through all phenomena has been growing ever clearer; and must eventually be freed from its imperfec- tions. The certainty that on the one hand such a Power exists, while on the other hand its nature transcends intu- ition, and is beyond imagination, is the certainty toward which intelligence has from the first been progressing." One would think, then, that the familiar and accepted word "the Inscrutable" (which is in this passage actually em- ployed, and to which no theologian would object) would be an infinitely better term than " the unknowable." The above extract has, however, such a theistic aspect that some readers may think the opposition here offered super- fluous ; it may be well, therefore, to quote two other sen- tences. In another place he observes : 4 " Passing over the consideration of credibility, and confining ourselves to that of conceivability, we see that atheism, pantheism, and the- ism, when rigorously analyzed, severally prove to be abso- lutely unthinkable ; " and speaking of " every form of reli- gion," he adds,6 " The analysis of every possible hypothesis proves, not simply that no hypothesis is sufficient, but that no hypothesis is even thinkable." The unknowable is ad- mitted to be a power which cannot be regarded as having very act of declaring the First Cause incognizable, you do not permit it to remain unknown. For that only is unknown of which you can neither affirm nor deny any predicate ; here you deny the power of self-disclosure to the ' Absolute,' of which, therefore, something is known — viz., that nothing can be known ! " 3 Loc. cit., p. 108. 4 Loc. cit., p. 43. 5 Loc. cit., p. 46. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 263 sympathy with us, but as one to which no emotion what- ever can be ascribed, and we are expressly forbidden, " by duty" to affirm personality of God as much as to deny it of Him. How such a being can be presented as an object on which to exercise religious emotion it is difficult indeed to understand.8 Aspiration, love, devotion to be poured forth upon what we can never know, upon what we can never affirm to know, or care for, us, our thoughts or actions, or to possess the attributes of wisdom and goodness ! The worship offered in such a religion must be, as* Prof. Huxley says,7 " for the most part of the silent sort " — silent not only as to the spoken word, but silent as to the mental conception also. It will be difficult to distinguish the fol- lower of this religion from the follower of none, and the man who declines either to assert or to deny the existence of God is practically in the position of an atheist. For theism enjoins the cultivation of sentiments of love and de- votion to God, and the practice of their external expression. Atheism forbids both, while the simply non-theist abstains in conformity with the prohibition of the atheist, and thus practically sides with him. Moreover, since man cannot imagine that of which he has no experience in any way whatever, and since he has experience only of human per- fections and of the powers and properties of inferior exist- ences, if he be required to deny human perfections and to 6 Mr. J. Martineau, in his "Essays," voL i., p. 211, observes : " Mr. Spencer's conditions of pious worship are hard to satisfy ; there must be between the Divine and human no communion of thought, relations of conscience, or approach of affection." ..." But you cannot constitute a religion out of mystery alone, any more than out of knowledge alone ; nor can you measure the relation of doctrines" to humility and piety by the mere amount of conscious darkness which they leave. All worship, being directed to what is above us and transcends our comprehension, stands in presence of a mystery. But not all that stands before a mys- tery is worship." 7 " Lay Sermons," p. 20. 264 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP abstain from making use of such conceptions, he is therebj necessarily reduced to others of an inferior order. Mr. H. Spencer says,8 "Those who espouse this alternative posi- tion make the erroneous assumption that the choice is be- tween personality and something lower than personality ; whereas the choice is rather between personality and some- thing higher. Is it not just possible that there is a mode of being as much transcending intelligence and will as these transcend mechanical motion ? " " It is true we are totally unable to conceive any such higher mode of being. But this is not a reason for ques- tioning its existence ; it is rather the reverse." " May we not therefore rightly refrain from assigning to the * ultimate cause' any attributes whatever, on the ground that such attributes, derived as they must be from our own natures, are not elevations but degradations ? " The way, how- ever, to arrive at the object aimed at (i. e., to obtain the best attainable conception of the First Cause) is not to re- frain from the only conceptions possible to us, but to seek the very highest of these, and then declare their utter inad- equacy; and this is precisely the course which has been pursued by theologians. It is to be regretted that, before writing on this matter, Mr. Spencer did not more thorough- ly acquaint himself with the ordinary doctrine on the sub- ject. It is always taught in the Church schools of divinity, that nothing, not even existence, is to be predicated univo- cally of " God " and " creatures ; " that, after exhausting ingenuity to arrive at the loftiest possible conceptions, we must declare them to be utterly inadequate / that, after all, they are but accommodations to human infirmity; that they are in a sense objectively false (because of their inad- equacy), though subjectively and very practically true. But the difference between this mode of treatment and that adopted by Mr. Spencer is wide indeed ; for the practical 8 Loc. cit., p. 109. \ XIL] THEOLOGY ANJ) EVOLUTION 265 result of the mode inculcated by the Church is, that each one may freely affirm and act upon the highest human con- ceptions he can attain of the power, wisdom, and goodness of God, His watchful care, His loving providence for every man, at every moment and in every need ; for the Chris- tian knows that the falseness of his conceptions lies only in their inadequacy > • he may therefore strengthen and re- fresh himself, may rejoice and revel in conceptions of the . goodness of God, drawn from the tenderest human images of fatherly care and love, or he may chasten and abase himself by consideration of the awful holiness and unap- proachable majesty of the Divinity derived from analogous sources, knowing that no thought of man can ever be true enough, can ever attain the incomprehensible reality, which nevertheless really is all that can be conceived, plus an in- conceivable infinity beyond. A good illustration of what is here meant, and of the difference between the theistic position and Mr. Spencer's, may be supplied by an example he has himself proposed. Thus,9 he imagines an intelligent watch speculating as to its maker, and conceiving of him in terms of watch-being, and figuring him as furnished with springs, escapements, cogged wheels, etc., his motions facilitated by oil — in a word, like himself. It is assumed by Mr. Spencer that this necessary watch conception would be completely false, and the illustration is made use of to show " the presumption of theologians " — the absurdity and unreasonableness of those men who figure the incomprehensible cause of all phenom- ena as a Being in some way comparable with man. Now, putting aside for the moment #11 other considerations, and accepting the illustration, surely the example demonstrates rather the unreasonableness of the objector himself? It is true, indeed, that a man is an organism indefinitely more complex and perfect than any watch ; but, if the watch • Loc. cit., p. Ill 12 266 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. could only conceive of its maker in watch terms, or else in terms altogether inferior, the watch would plainly be right in speaking of its maker as a, to it, inconceivably perfect kind of watch, acknowledging, at the same time, that this, its conception of him, was utterly inadequate, although the best its inferior nature allowed it to form. For, if, instead of so conceiving of its maker, it refused to make use of these relative perfections as a makeshift, and so necessarily thought of him as amorphous metal, or mere oil, or by the help of any other inferior conception which a watch might be imagined capable of entertaining, that watch would be wrong indeed. For man can much more properly be com- pared with, and has much more affinity to, a perfect watch in full activity than to a mere piece of metal, or drop of oil. But the watch is even more in the right still, for its maker, man, virtually has the cogged wheels, springs, escapements, oil, etc., which the watch's conception has been supposed to attribute to him ; inasmuch as all these parts must have existed as distinct ideas in the human watchmaker's mind before he could actually construct the clock formed by him. Nor is even this all, for, by the hypothesis, the watch thinks. It must, therefore, think of its maker as " a thinking being," and in this it is absolutely and completely right.1* Either, therefore, the hypothesis is absurd, or it actually demon- strates the very position it was chosen to refute. Unques- tionably, then, on the mere ground taken by Mr. Herbert Spencer himself, if we are compelled to think of the First Cause either in human terms (but with human imperfections abstracted and human perfections carried to the highest con- ceivable degree), or, on the other hand, in terms decidedly inferior, such as those are driven to who think of Him, but decline to accept as a help the term " personality," there 10 In this criticism on Mr. Herbert Spencer, the author finds he has been anticipated by Mr. James Martirfeau. (See " Essays," vol. i., p. 208.; XH.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 267 can be no question but that the first conception is immeas- urably nearer the- truth than the second. Yet the latter is the one put forward and advocated by that author in spite of its unreasonableness, and in spite also of its conflicting with the whole moral nature of man and all his noblest aspirations. Again, Mr. Herbert Spencer objects to the conception of God as " first cause," on the ground that " when our sym- bolic conceptions are such that no cumulative or indirect processes of thought can enable us to ascertain that there are corresponding actualities, nor any predictions be made whose" fulfilment can prove this, then they are altogether vicious and illusive, and in no wayj distinguishable from pure fictions." " Now, it is quite true that " symbolic conceptions," which are not to be justified either (1) by presentations of sense, or (2) by intuitions, are invalid as representations of real truth. Yet the conception of God referred to is justified by our primary intuitions, and we can assure ourselves that it does stand for an actuality by comparing it with (1) our intuitions of free-will and causation, and (2) our intuitions of morality and responsibility. That we have these intui- tions is a point on which the author joins issue with Mr. Spencer, and confidently affirms that they cannot logically be denied without at the same time complete and absolute skepticism resulting from such denial — skepticism wherein vanishes any certainty as to the existence both of Mr. Spencer and his critic, and by which it is equally impossible to have a thought free from doubt, or to go so far as to affirm the existence of that very doubt or of the doubter who doubts it. It may not be amiss here to protest against the intoler- able assumption of a certain school, who are continually talking in lofty terms of " science," but who actually speak 11 Loc. cit., p. 29. 268 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. of primary religious conceptions as "unscientific," and habitually employ the word " science," when they should limit it by the prefix " physical." This is the more amazing, as not a few of this school adopt the idealist philosophy, and affirm that " matter and force " are but names for certain " modes of consciousness." It might be expected of them at least to admit that opinions which repose on primary and fundamental intuitions are especially and par excellence scientific. Such are some of the objections to the Christian concep- tion of God. We may now turn to those which are directed against God as the Creator, i. e., as the absolute originator of the universe, without the employment of any preexisting means or material. This is again considered by Mr. Spen- cer as a thoroughly illegitimate symbolic conception, as much so as the atheistic one — the difficulty as to a self- existent Creator being in his opinion equal to that of a self- existent universe. To this it may be replied that both are of course equally unimaginable, but that it is not a question of facility of conception — not which is easiest to conceive, but which best accounts for, and accords with, psychological facts ; namely, with the above-mentioned intuitions. It is contended that we have these primary intuitions, and that with these the conception of a self-existent Creator is per- fectly harmonious. On the other hand, the notion of a self-existent universe — that there is no real distinction between the finite and the infinite — that the universe and ourselves are one and the same things with the infinite and the self-existent — these assertions, in addition to being un- imaginable, contradict our primary intuitions. Mr. Darwin's objections to " Creation " are of quite a different kind, and, before entering upon them, it will be well to endeavor clearly to understand what we mean by " Creation," in the various senses in which the term may be used. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 269 In the strictest and highest sense "Creation" is the absolute origination of any thing by God without preexist- ing means or material, and is a supernatural act.12 In the secondary and lower sense, " Creation " is the formation of any thing by God derivatively ; that is, that the preceding matter has been created with the potentiality to evolve from ii,, under suitable conditions, all the various forms it subsequently assumes. And this power having been conferred by God in the first instance, and those laws and powers having been instituted by Him, through the action of which the suitable conditions are supplied, He is said, in this lower sense, to create such various subsequent forms. This is the natural action of God in the physical world, as distinguished from His direct, or, as it may be here called, supernatural action. In yet a third sense, the word " Creation " may be more or less improperly applied to the construction of any com- plex formation or state by a voluntary self-conscious being who makes use of the powers and laws which God has im- posed, as when a man is spoken of as the creator of a museum, or of "his own fortune," etc. Such action of a created conscious intelligence is purely natural, but more than physical, and may be conveniently spoken of as hyper- physidal. We have thus (1) direct or supernatural action; (2) phys- ical action ; and (3) hyperphysical action — the two latter both belonging to the order of nature.13 Neither the phys- ical nor the hyperphysical actions, however, exclude the 12 The author means by this, that it is directly and immediately the act of God, the word " supernatural " being used in a sense convenient for the purposes of this, work, and not hi its ordinary theological sense. 13 The phrase " order of nature " is not here used in its theological sense as distinguished from the " order of grace," but as a term, here convenient, to denote actions not due to direct and immediate Divine in- tervention. 270 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. idea of the Divine concurrence, and with every consistent theist that idea is necessarily included. Dr. Asa Gray has given expression to this.14 He says, " Agreeing that plants and animals were produced by Omnipotent fiat does not exclude the idea of natural order and what we call second- ary causes. The record of the fiat — ' Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed,' etc., 'let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind ' — seems even to imply them," and leads to the conclusion that the various kinds were produced through natural agencies. .Now, much confusion has arisen from not keeping clearly in view this distinction between absolute creation and derivative creation. With the first, physical science has plainly nothing whatever to do, and is impotent to prove or to refute it. The second is also safe from any at- tack on the part of physical science, for it is primarily derived from psychical not physical phenomena. The greater part of the apparent force possessed by objectors to creation, like Mr. Darwin, lies in their treating the asser- tion of derivative creation as if it was an assertion of abso- lute creation, or at least of supernatural action. Thus, he asks whether some of his opponents believe " that, at innu- merable periods in the earth's history, certain elemental atoms have been commanded suddenly to flash into living tissues." ] Certain of Mr. Darwin's objections, however, are not physical, but metaphysical, and really attack the dogma of secondary or derivative creation, though to some perhaps they may appear to be directed against absolute creation only. Thus he uses, as an illustration, the conception of a man who builds an edifice from fragments of rock at the base of a precipice, by selecting, for the construction of the various 14 " A Free Examination of Darwin's Treatise," p. 29, reprinted from the Atlantic Monthly for July, August, and October, 1860. 15 "Origin of Species," 5th edit., p. 571. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 271 parts of the building, the pieces which are the most suitable, owing to the shape they happen to have broken into. After- ward, alluding to this illustration, he says : " " The shape of the fragments of stone at the base of our precipice may be called accidental, but this is not strictly correct, for the shape of each depends on a long sequence of events, all obeying natural laws, on the nature of the rock, on the lines of stratification or cleavage, on the form of the mountain which depends on its upheaval and subsequent denudation, and lastly, on the storm and earthquake which threw down the fragments. But, in regard to the use to which the fragments may be put, their shape may strictly be said to be accidental. And here we are led to face a great difficulty, in alluding to which I am aware that I am travelling beyond my proper province." " An omniscient Creator must have foreseen every conse- quence which results from the laws imposed by Him ; but can it be reasonably maintained that the Creator intention- ally ordered, if we use the words in any ordinary sense, that certain fragments of rock should assume certain shapes, so that the builder might erect his edifice ? If the various laws which have determined the shape of each fragment were not predetermined for the builder's sake, can it with any greater probability be maintained that He specially ordained, for the sake of the breeder, each of the innumera- ble variations in our domestic animals and plants — many of these variations being of no service to man, and not beneficial, far more often injurious, to the creatures them- selves ? Did He ordain that the crop and tail-feathers of the pigeon should vary, in order that the fancier might make his grotesque pouter and fantail breeds? Did He cause the frame and mental qualities of the dog to vary, in order that a breed might be formed of indomitable ferocity, with jaws fitted to pin down the bull for man's brutal sport ? 16 "Animals and Plants under Domestication," vol. ii., p. 431 272 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. CHAP. But, if we give up the principle in one case — if we do not admit that the variations of the primeval dog were inten- tionally guided, in order that the greyhound, for instance, that perfect image of symmetry and vigor, might be formed — no shadow of reason can be assigned for the belief that the variations, alike in Nature, and the result of the same general laws, which have been the groundwork through " Natural Selection " of the formation of the most perfectly-adapted animals in the world, man included, were intentionally and specially guided. However much we may wish it, we can hardly follow Prof. Asa Gray in his belief that ' variation has been led along certain beneficial lines,' like a stream * along definite and useful lines of irri- gation.' " " If we assume that each particular variation was from the beginning of all time preordained, the plasticity of the organization, which leads to many injurious deviations of structure, as well as that redundant power of reproduction which inevitably leads to a struggle for existence, and, as a consequence, to the " Natural Selection " and survival of the fittest, must appear to us superfluous laws of Nature. On the other hand, an omnipotent and omniscient Creator or- dains every thing and foresees every thing. Thus we are brought face to face with a difficulty as insoluble as is that of free-will and predestination." Before proceeding to reply to this remarkable passage, it may be well to remind some readers that belief in the existence of God, in His primary creation of the universe, and in His derivative creation of all kinds of being, inor- ganic and organic, do not repose upon physical phenomena, but, as has been said, on primary intuitions. To deny or ridicule any of these beliefs on physical grounds is to com- mit the fallacy of ignoratio elenchi. It is to commit an absurdity analogous to that of saying a blind child could not recognize his father because he could not see him, for- getting that he could hear and feel him. Yet there are XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 273 some who appear to find it unreasonable and absurd that men should regard phenomena, in a light not furnished by or deducible from the very phenomena themselves, although the men so regarding them avow that the light in which they do view them comes from quite another source. It is as if a man, A, coming into B's room and finding there a butterfly, should insist that B had no right to believe that the butterfly had not flown in at the open window, inasmuch as there was nothing about the room or insect to lead to any other belief; while B can well sustain his right so to believe, he having met 0, who told him he brought in the chrysalis, arid, having seen the insect emerge, took away the skin. By a similarly narrow and incomplete view, the asser- tion that human conceptions, such as " the vertebrate idea," etc., are ideas in the mind of God, is sometimes ridiculed ; as if the assertors either on the one hand pretended to some prodigious acuteness of mind — a far-reaching genius not possessed by most naturalists — or, on the other hand, as if they detected, in the very phenomena furnishing such special conception, evidences of Divine imaginings. But let the idea of God, according to the highest conceptions of Christianity, be once accepted, and then it becomes simply a truism to say that the mind of the Deity contains all that is good and positive in the mind of man, plus, of course, an absolutely inconceivable infinity beyond. That thus such human conceptions may, nay must, be asserted to be at the same time ideas in the Divine mind also, as every real and separate individual that has been, is, or shall be, is present to the same mind. Nay, more, that such human conceptions are but faint and obscure adumbrations of cor- responding ideas which exist in the mind of God in perfec- tion and fulness. " n The Rev. Baden Powell says : " All sciences approach perfection as they approach to a unity of first principles- — hi all cases recurring to or 274 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. The theist, having arrived at his theistic convictions from quite other sources than a consideration of zoological or botanical phenomena, returns to the consideration of such phenomena and views them in a theistic light, without of course asserting or implying that such light has been de- rived from them, or that there is an obligation of reason so to view them on the part of others who refuse to enter upon or to accept those other sources whence have been derived the theistic convictions of the theist. But Mr. Darwin is not guilty of arguing against meta- physical ideas on physical grounds only, for he employs very distinctly metaphysical ones ; namely, his conceptions of the nature and attributes of the First Cause. But what conceptions does he offer us ? Nothing but that low an- thropomorphism which, unfortunately, he *so often seems to treat as the necessary result of Theism. It is again the dummy, helpless and deformed, set up merely for the purpose of being knocked down. tending toward certain high elementary conceptions which are the repre- sentatives of the unity of the great archetypal ideas according to which the whole system is arranged. Inductive conceptions, very partially and imperfectly realized and apprehended by human intellect, are the expo- nents in our minds of these great principles of Nature." " All science is but the partial reflection, in the reason of man, of the great all-pervading reason of the universe. And thus the unify of science is the reflection of the unity of Nature, and of the unity of that supreme reason and intelligence which pervades and rules over Nature, and from whence all reason and all science is derived." (Unity of Worlds, Essay L, § it ; Unity of Sciences, pp. 79, 81.) Also he quotes from Oersted's "Soul in Nature" (pp. 12, 16, 18, 87, 92, 377). "If the laws of reason did not exist in Nature, we should vainly attempt to force them upon her : if the laws of Nature did not exist in our reason, we should not be able to comprehend them." ..." We find a.n agreement between our reason and works which our reason did not produce." ..." All exist- ence is a dominion of reason." " The laws of Nature are laws of reason, and altogether form an endless unity of reason ; . . . one and the same throughout the universe." XII.] THEOLOGY AXD EVOLUTION. 275 It must once more be insisted on, that, though, man is indeed compelled to conceive of God in human terms, and to speak of Him by epithets objectively false, from their hopeless inadequacy, yet 'nevertheless the Christian thinker declares that inadequacy in the strongest manner, and vehe- mently rejects from his idea of God all terms distinctly im- plying infirmity or limitation. Now, Mr. Darwin speaks as if all who believe in the Almighty were compelled to accept as really applicable to the Deitv conceptions which affirm limits and imperfections. Thus he says : " Can it be reasonably maintained that the Creator intentionally ordered " " that certain fragments of rock should assume certain shapes, so that the builder might erect his edifice ? " Why, surely every theist must maintain that in the first foundation of the universe — the primary and absolute crea- tion— God saw and knew every purpose which every atom and particle of matter should ever subserve in all suns and systems, and throughout all coming aeons of time. It is almost incredible, but nevertheless it seems necessary to think that the difficulty thus proposed rests on a sort of notion that amid the boundless profusion of Nature there is too much for God to superintend ; that the number of objects is too great for an infinite and omnipresent being to attend singly to each and all in their due proportions and needs ! In the same way Mr. Darwin asks whether God can have ordered the race variations referred to in the passage last quoted, for the considerations therein mentioned. To this it may be at once replied that even man often has several distinct intentions and motives for a single action, and the theist has no difficulty in supposing that, out of an infinite number of motives, the motive mentioned in each case may have been an exceedingly subordinate one. The theist, though properly attributing to God what, for want of a better term, he calls " purpose " and " design," yet 276 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. affirms that the limitations of human purposes and motives are by no means applicable to the Divine " purposes." Out of many, say a thousand million, reasons for the institution of the laws of the physical universe, some few are to a certain extent conceivable by us ; and among these the benefits, material and moral, accruing from them to men, and to each individual man in every circumstance of his life, play a certain, perhaps a very subordinate, part.18 As Baden Powell observes, " How can we undertake to affirm, amid all the possibilities of things of which we confessedly know so little, that a thousand ends and purposes may not be answered, because we can trace none, or even imagine none, which seem to our short-sighted faculties to be an- swered in these particular arrangements ? " 19 The objection to the bull-dog's ferocity in connection 18 In the same way Mr. Lewes, in criticising the Duke of Argyll's "Keign of Law" (Fortnightly Review, July, 1867, p. 100), asks whether we should consider that man wise who spilt a gallon of wine in order to fill a wine-glass ? But, because we should not do so, it by no means follows that we can argue from such an action to the action of God in the visible universe. For the man's object, in the case supposed, is simply to fill the wine-glass, and the wine spilt is so much loss. With God it may be entirely different in both respects. All these objections are fully met by the principle thus laid down by St. Thomas Aquinas : " Quod si aliqua causa particularis deficiat a suo effectu, hoc est propter aliquam causam particularem impediantem quae continetur sub ordine causae universalis. Unde effectus ordinem causoe universalis nullo modo potest exire." . . . "Sicut indigestio contingit praster ordinem virtutis nutritivae ex aliquo impedimento, puta ex grossitie cibi, quam necesse est reducere in aliam causam, et sic usque ad causam primam universalem. Cum igitur Deus sit prima causa universalis non unius generi tantum, sed universaliter totius entis, impossibile est quod aliquid contingat prater ordinem divinae gubernationis ; sed ex hoc ipso quod aliquid ex una parte videtur exire ab ordine divinae providentias, quo consideratur secundam aliquam particularem causam, necesse est quod in eundem ordinem relabatur secundum aliam causam." — Sum. Theol., p. i., q. 19, a. 6, and q. 103, a. 7. 19 "Unity of Worlds," Essay ii., § ii., p. 260. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 277 with " man's brutal sport " opens up the familiar but vast question of the existence of evil, a problem the discussion of which would be out of place here. Considering, however, the very great stress which is laid in the present day on the subject of animal suffering by so many amiable and excel- lent people, one or two remarks on that matter may not be superfluous. To those who accept the belief in God, the soul and moral responsibility ; and recognize the full results of that acceptance — to such, physical suffering and moral evil are simply incommensurable. To them the placing of non-moral beings in the same scale with moral agents will be utterly unendurable. But even considering physical pain only, all must admit that this depends greatly on the mental condition of the sufferer. Only during conscious- ness does it exist, and only in the most highly-organized men does it reach its acme. The author has been assured that lower races of men appear less keenly sensitive to physi- cal pain than do more cultivated and refined human beings. Thus only in man can there really be any intense degree of suffering, because only in him is there that intellectual rec- ollection of past moments and that anticipation of future ones, which constitute in great part the bitterness of suf- fering.20 The momentary pang, the present pain, which beasts endure, though real enough, is yet, doubtless, not to be compared as to its intensity with the suffering which is produced in man through his high prerogative of self-con- sciousness.21 As to the " beneficial lines " (of Dr. Asa Gray, be- fore referred to), some of the facts noticed in the preceding chapters seem to point very decidedly in that direction, but 20 See the exceedingly good passage on this subject by the Rev. Dr. Newman, in his "Discourses for Mixed Congregations," 1850, p. 345. 81 See Mr. G. H. Lewes's " Sea-Side Studies," for some excellent re- marks, beginning at p. 329, as to the small susceptibility of certain ani- mals to pain. 278 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. all must admit that the actual existing outcome is far more " beneficial " than the reverse. The natural universe has resulted in the development of an unmistakable harmony and beaut v, and in a decided preponderance of good and of happiness over their opposites. Even if " laws of Nature " did appear, on the theistic hypothesis, to be " superfluous " (which it is by no means intended here to admit), it would be nothing less than pue- rile to prefer rejecting the hypothesis to conceiving that the appearance of superfluity was probably due to human ignorance ; and this especially might be expected from nat- uralists to whom the interdependence of Nature and the harmony and utility of obscure phenomena are becoming continually more clear, as, e. g., the structure of orchids to their illustrious expositor. Having now cleared the ground somewhat, we may turn to the question what bearing Christian dogma has upon evolution, and whether Christians, as such, need take up any definite attitude concerning it. As has been said, it is plain that physical science and " evolution " can have nothing whatever to do with absolute or primary creation. The Rev. Baden Powell well expresses this, saying : " Science demonstrates incessant past changes, and dimly points to yet earlier links in a more vast series of development of material existence ; but the idea of a be- ginning, or of creation, in the sense of the original operation of the Divine volition to constitute Nature and matter, is be- yond the province of physical philosophy." 22 With secondary or derivative creation, physical science is also incapable of conflict ; for the objections drawn by some writers seemingly from physical science are, as has been already argued, rather metaphysical than physical. Derivative creation is not a supernatural act, but is simply the Divine action by and through natural laws. To 22 " Philosophy of Creation," Essay iii., § iv., p. 480. XII.] THEOLOGY AXD EVOLUTION. 279 recognize such action in such laws is a religious mode of re- garding phenomena, which a consistent theist must neces- sarily accept, and which an atheistic believer must similarly reject. But this conception, if deemed superfluous by any naturalist, can never be shown to be false by any investiga- tions concerning natural laws, the constant action of which it presupposes. The conflict has arisen through a misunderstanding. Some have supposed that by " creation " was necessarily meant either primary, that is, absolute creation, or, at least, some supernatural action ; they have therefore opposed the dogma of " creation " in the imagined interest of physical science. Others have supposed that by " evolution " was neces- sarily meant a denial of Divine action, a negation of the providence of God. They have therefore combated the theory of " evolution " in the imagined interest of religion. It appears plain, then, that Christian thinkers are perfectly free to accept the general evolution theory. But are there any theological authorities to justify this view of the mat- ter? Now, considering how extremely recent are these bio- logical speculations, it might hardly be expected a priori that writers of earlier ages should have given expression to doctrines harmonizing in any degree with such very modern views,23 nevertheless such most certainly is the case, and it 23 It seems almost strange that modern English thought should so long hold aloof from familiar communion with Christian writers of other ages and countries. It is rarely indeed that acquaintance is shown with such authors, though a bright example to the contrary was set by Sir William Hamilton. Sir Charles Lyell (hi his "Principles of Geology," 7th edition, p. 35) speaks with approval of the early Italian geologists. Of Yallisneri he says, " I return with pleasure to the geologists of Italy who preceded, as has been already shown, the naturalists Of other coun- tries in their investigations into the ancient history of the earth, and who still maintained a decided preeminence. They refuted and ridiculed the 280 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. would be easy to give numerous examples. It will be bet- ter, however, only to cite one or two authorities of weight. Now, perhaps no writer of the earlier Christian ages could be quoted whose authority is more generally recognized than that of St. Augustine. The same may be said of the mediaeval period, for St. Thomas Aquinas ; and, since the physico-theological systems of Burnet, Whiston, and Woodward ; while Vallisneri, hi his comments on the Woodwardian theory, remarked how much the interests of religion, as well as those of sound philosophy, had suffered by perpetually mixing up the sacred writings with questions of physical science." Again, he quotes the Carmelite friar Generelli, who, illustrating Moro before the Academy of Cremona in 1749, strongly opposed those who would introduce the supernatural into the domain of Nature. " I hold in utter abomination, most learned Academicians ! those systems which are» built with their foundations in the air, and can- not be propped up without a miracle, and I undertake, with the assist- ance of Moro, to explain to you how these marine monsters were trans- ported into the mountains by natural causes." Sir Charles Lyell notices with exemplary impartiality the spirit of in- tolerance on both sides. How in France, Buffon, on the one hand, was influenced by the theological faculty of the Sorboime to recant his theory of the earth, and how Voltaire, on the other, allowed his prejudices to get the better, if not of his judgment, certainly of his expression of it. Thinking that fossil remains of shells, etc., were evidence in favor of or- thodox views, Voltaire, Sir Charles Lyell (Principles, p. 56) tells us, " endeavored to inculcate skepticism as to the real nature of such shells, and to recall from contempt the exploded dogma of the sixteenth cen- tury, that they were sports of Nature. He also pretended that vegetable impressions were not those of real plants." ..." He would sometimes, in defiance of all consistency, shift his ground when addressing the vul- gar ; and, admitting the true nature of the shells collected in the Alps and other places, pretend that they were Eastern species, which had fallen from the hats of pilgrims coming from Syria. The numerous essays written by him on geological subjects were all calculated to strengthen prejudices, partly because he was ignorant of the real state of the science, and partly from his bad faith." As to the harmony between many early Church writers of great authority and modern views as regards certain matters of geology, see " Geology and Revelation," by the Rev. Gerald Molloy, D. D., London, 1870. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 281 movement of Luther, Suarez may be taken as a writer widely venerated as an authority, and one whose orthodoxy has never been questioned. It must be borne in mind that, for a considerable time after even the last of these writers, no one had disputed the generally-received view as to the small age of the world or at least of the kinds of animals and plants inhabiting it. It becomes therefore much more striking if views formed under such a condition of opinion are found to harmonize with modern ideas regarding " Creation " and organic life. Now, St. Augustine insists in a very remarkable manner on the merely derivative sense in which God's creation of or- ganic forms is to be understood ; that is, that God created them by conferring on the material world the power to evolve them under suitable conditions. He says in his book on Genesis : " " Terrestria animalia, tanquam ex ultimo ele- mento mundi ultima ; nihilominus potentialiter, quorum nu- meros tempus postea visibiliter explicaret." Again he says : " Sicut autem in ipso grano invisibiliter erant omnia simul, quae per tempora in arborem surgerent ; ita ipse mun- dus cogitandus est, cum Deus simul omnia creavit, habuisse simul omnia quae in illo et cum illo facta sunt quando factus est dies ; non solum ccelum cum sole et luna et sideribus . . . . ; sed etiam ilia quse aqua et terra produxit potentialiter atque causaliter, priusquam per temporum moras its exori- rentur, quomodo nobis jam nota sunt in eis operibus, quae Deus usque nunc operatur." ™ " Omnium quippe rerum quae corporaliter visibiliterque nascuntur, occulta quaedam semina in istis corporeis mundi hujus elementis latent." 2a 24 " De Genesi ad Litt.," lib. v., cap. v., No. 14 in Ben. Edition, vol. Hi., p. 186. V Lib. cit., cap. xxii., No. 44. 86 Lib. cit., "De Trinitate," lib. Hi., cap. viii., No. 14. 282 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. And again : " Ista quippe originaliter ac primordialiter in quadam textura elementorum cuncta jam creata sunt ; sed acceptis opportunitatibus prodeunt." 27 St. Thomas Aquinas, as was said in the first chapter, quotes with approval the saying of St. Augustine, that in the first institution of Nature we do not look for Miracles, but for the laws of Nature : " In prima institutione natures non quaeritur miraculum, sed quid natura rerum habeat, ut Augustinus dicit." 28 Again, he quotes with approval St. Augustine's asser- tion that the kinds were created only derivatively, " potenti- aliter tantum" 29 Also he says : " In prima autem rerum institutione fuit principium activum verbum Dei, quod de materia elementari produxit animalia, vel in actua vel virtute, secundum Aug. lib. 5 de Gen. ad lit. c. 5." 80 Speaking of " kinds " (in scholastic phraseology " sub- stantial forms") latent in matter, he says: "Quas qui- dam posuerunt non incipere per actionem naturae sed prius in materia exstitisse, ponentes latitationem formarum. Et hoc accidit eis ex ignorantia materiae, quia nesciebant distin- guere inter potentiam et actum. Quia enim formaa praeex- istunt eas simpliciter praeexistere." 31 Also Cornelius a Lapide 32 contends that at least certain animals were not absolutely, but only derivatively created, saying of them, " Non fuerunt creata formaliter, sed poten- tialiter." As to Suarez, it will be enough to refer to Disp. xv. § 2, n. 9, p. 508, t. i. Edition Vives, Paris; also Nos. 13-15, 27 Lib. cit., cap. ix., No. 16. 28 St. Thomas, Summa, i., quest. 67, art. 4, ad 3. 29 Primae Partis, vol. ii., quest. 74, art. 2. 30 Lib. cit., quest. 71, art. 1. 81 Lib. cit, quest. 45, art. 8. 52 Vide In Genesim Comment., cap. i. XII] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 283 and many other references to the same effect could easily be given, but these may suffice. It is then evident that ancient and most venerable theo- logical authorities distinctly assert derivative creation, and thus harmonize with all that modern science can possibly require. It may indeed truly be said with Roger Bacon, " The saints never condemned many an opinion which the moderns think ought to be condemned." ' The various extracts given show clearly how far " evolu- tion " is from any necessary opposition to the most orthodox theology. The same may be said of spontaneous genera- tion. The most recent form of it, lately advocated by Dr. H. Charlton Bastian,34 teaches that matter exists in two different forms, the crystalline (or statical) and the colloidal (or dynamical) conditions. It also teaches that colloidal matter, when exposed to certain conditions, presents the phenomena of life, and that it can be formed from crystal- line matter, and thus that the prima materia, of which these are diverse forms, contains potentially all the multitudinous kinds of animal and vegetable existence. This theory, more- over, harmonizes well with the views here advocated, for just as crystalline matter builds itself, under suitable con- ditions, along certain definite lines, so analogously colloidal matter has its definite lines and directions of development. It is not collected in haphazard, accidental aggregations, but evolves according to its proper laws and special proper- ties. 23 Roger Bacon, Opus tertmm, c. ix., p. 27, quoted in the Rambler for 1859, vol. xii., p. 375. 34 See Nature, June and July, 1870. Those who, like Profs. Huxley and Tyndall, do not accept his conclusions, none the less agree with him in principle, though they limit the evolution of the organic world from the inorganic to a very remote period of the world's history. (See Pro£ Huxley's address to the British Association at Liverpool, 1870, p. 17.) 284. THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. The perfect orthodoxy of these views is unquestionable. Nothing is plainer from the venerable writers quoted, as well as from a mass of other authorities, than that " the super- natural " is not to be looked for or expected in the sphere of mere Nature. For this statement there is a general con- sensus of theological authority. The teaching which the author has received is, that God is indeed inscrutable and incomprehensible to us from the infinity of His attributes, so that our minds can, as it were, only take in, in a most fragmentary and indistinct manner (as through a glass darkly), dim conceptions of infinitesimal portions of His inconceivable perfection. In this way the partial glimpses obtained by us in different modes differ from each other ; not that God is any thing but the most perfect unity, but that apparently conflicting views arise from our inability to apprehend Him, except in this imper- fect manner, i. e., by successive slight approximations along different lines of approach. Sir William Hamilton has said,38 " Nature conceals God, and man reveals Him." It is not, according to the teaching spoken of, exactly thus; but rather that physical Nature reveals to us one side, one aspect of the Deity, while the moral and religious worlds bring us in contact with another, and at first, to our appre- hension, a very different one. The difference and discrep- ancy, however, which is at first felt, is soon seen to proceed not from the reason, but from a want of flexibility in the imagination. This want is far from surprising. Not only may a man naturally be expected to be an adept in his own art, but at the same time to show an incapacity for a very different mode of activity.38 We rarely find an artist who 35 " Lectures on Metaphysics and Logic," vol. i., Lecture ii., p. 40. 36 In the same way that an undue cultivation of any one kind of knowledge is prejudicial to philosophy. Mr. James Martineau well ob- serves : " Nothing is more common than to see maxims, which are unex- ceptionable as the assumptions of particular sciences, coerced into the XII.] TIIEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. takes much interest in jurisprudence, or a prize-fighter who is an acute metaphysician. Nay, more than this, a positive distaste may grow up, which, in the intellectual order, may amount to a spontaneous and unreasoning disbelief in that which appears to be in opposition to the more familiar con- cept, and this at all times. It is often and truly said, that " past ages were preeminently credulous as compared with our own, yet the difference is not so much in the amount of the credulity, as in the direction which it takes." " Dr. Newman observes : " Any one study, of whatever kind, exclusively pursued, deadens in the mind the interest, nay, the perception of any other. Thus Cicero says that Plato and Demosthenes, Aristotle and Isocrates, might have respectively excelled in each other's province, but that each was absorbed in his own. Specimens of this peculiar- ity occur every day. You can hardly persuade some men to talk about any thing but their own pursuit ; they refer the whole world to their own centre, and measure all matters by •their own rule, like the fisherman in the drama, whose eu- logy on his deceased lord was, ' He was so fond of fish.' " " The same author further says : *a " When any thing, which comes before us, is very unlike wh#t we commonly service of a universal philosophy, and so turned into instruments of mis- chief and distortion. That " we can know nothing but phenomena " — that " causation is simply constant priority " — that " men are governed invariably by their interests," are examples of rules allowable as domi- nant hypotheses in physics or political economy, but exercising a deso- lating tyranny when thrust on to the throne of universal empire. He who seizes upon these and similar maxims, and carries them in triumph on his banner, may boast of his escape from the uncertainties of meta- physics, but is himself all the while the unconscious victim of their very vulgarest deception." ("Essays," Second Series, A Plea for Philosophi- cal Studies, p. 421.) 37 Lecky's " History of Rationalism," voL i., p. 73. 38 "Lectures on University Subjects," by J. H. Newman, D. D., p. 322. 89 Loc. cit., p. 324. 286 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. experience, we consider it on that account untrue ; not be- cause it really shocks our reason as improbable, but because it startles our imagination as strange. Now, revelation presents to us a perfectly different aspect of the universe from that presented by the sciences. The two informations are like the distinct subjects represented by the lines of the same drawing, which, accordingly as they are read on their concave or convex side, exhibit to us now a group of trees with branches and leaves, and now human faces." .... <: While, then, reason and revelation are consistent in fact, they often are inconsistent in appearance ; and this seeming discordance acts most keenly on the imagination, and may suddenly expose a man to the temptation, and even hurry him on to the commission, of definite acts of unbelief., in which reason itself really does not come into exercise at all."40 Thus we find in fact just that distinctness between the ideas derived from physical science on the one hand and from religion on the other, which we might a priori expect, if there exists that distinctness between the natural and the miraculous which theological authorities lay down. Assuming, for argument's sake, the truth of Christian- ity, it evidently has not been the intention of its author to make the evidence for it so plain that its rejection would be the mark of intellectual incapacity. Conviction is not forced upon men in the way that the knowledge that the government of England is constitutional, or that Paris is the capital of France, is forced upon all who choose to in- quire into those subjects. The Christian system is one which puts on the strain, as it were, every faculty of man's 40 Thus Prof. T^yndall, in the Pall Mall Gazette of June 15, 1868, speaking of physical science, observes : " The logical feebleness of science is not sufficiently borne in mind. It keeps down the weed of supersti- tion, not by logic, but by slowly rendering the mental soil unfit for its cultivation." XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 287 nature, and the intellect is not (any more than we should a priori expect it to be) exempted from taking part in the probationary trial. A moral element enters into the ac- ceptance of that system. And so with natural religion — with those ideas of the supernatural, viz., God, Creation, and Morality, which are anterior to revelation and repose upon reason. Here, again, it evidently has not been the intention of the Creator to make the evidence of His existence so plain that its non- recognition would be the mark of intellectual incapacity. Conviction, as to theism, is not forced upon men as is the conviction of the existence of the sun at noonday.41 A moral element also enters here, and the analogy there is in this respect between Christianity and theism speaks elo- quently of their primary derivation from one common author. Thus we might expect that it would be a vain task to seek anywhere in Nature for evidence of Divine action, such that no one could sanely deny it. God will not allow Himself to be caught at the bottom of any man's crucible, or yield Himself to the experiments of gross-minded and irreverent inquirers. The natural, like the supernatural, revelation appeals to the whole of man's mental nature and not to the reason alone.™ None, therefore, need feel disappointed that evidence of the direct action of the first cause in merely natural phe- nomena ever eludes our grasp ; for assuredly those same phenomena will ever remain fundamentally inexplicable by physical science alone. There being, then, nothing in either authority or reason 41 But this is not, of course, meant to deny that the existence of God can be demonstrated, so as to demand the assent of the intellect taken, so to speak, by itself. 43 See some excellent remarks in the Rev. Dr. Newman's Parochial Sermons — the new edition (1869), vol. L, p. 211. 288 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. which makes "evolution" repugnant to Christianity, is there any thing in the Christian doctrine of " Creation " which is repugnant to the theory of " evolution ? " Enough has been said as to the distinction between ab- solute and derivative " creation." It remains to consider the successive " evolution " (Darwinian and other) of " spe- cific forms," in a theological light. As to what " evolution " is, we cannot of course hope to explain it completely, but it may be enough to define it as the manifestation to the intellect, by means of sensible impressions, of some ideal entity (power, principle, nature, or activity) which before that manifestation was in a la- tent, unrealized, and merely "potential" state — a state that is capable of becoming realized, actual, or manifest, the requisite conditions being supplied. " Specific forms," kinds or species, are (as was said in the introductory chapter) " peculiar congeries of characters or attributes, innate powers and qualities, and a certain nature realized in individuals." Thus, then, the " evolution of specific forms " means the actual manifestation of special powers, or natures, which before were latent, in such a successive manner that there is in some way a genetic relation between posterior mani- festations and those which preceded them. On the special Darwinian hypothesis, the manifestation of these forms is 'determined simply by the survival of the fittest of many indefinite variations. On the hypothesis here advocated the manifestation is controlled and helped by such survival, but depends on some unknown internal law or laws which determine varia- tion at special times and in special directions. Pro£ Agassiz objects to the evolution theory, on the ground that "species, genera, families, etc., exist as thoughts, individuals as facts, " " and he offers the dilemma, 48 American Journal of Science, July, 1860, p. 143, quoted in Dr. Asa Gray's pamphlet, p 47. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 289 "If species do not exist at all, as the supporters of the transmutation theory maintain, how can they vary ? and if individuals alone exist, how can the differences which may be observed among them prove the variability of species ? " But the supporter of " evolution " need only maintain that the several " kinds " become manifested gradually by slight differences among the various individual embodi- ments of one specific idea. He might reply to the dilem- ma by saying, species do not exist a$ species in the sense in which they are said to vary (variation applying only to the concrete embodiments of the specific idea), and the evolution of species is demonstrated not by individuals as individuals, but as embodiments of different specific ideas. Some persons seem to object to the term " creation " being applied to evolution, because evolution is an " ex- ceedingly slow and gradual process." Now, even if it were demonstrated that such is really the case, it may be asked, what is " slow and gradual ? " The terms are simply rela- tive, and the evolution of a specific form in ten thousand years would be instantaneous to a being whose days were as hundreds of millions of years. There are others, again, who are inclined absolutely to deny the existence of species altogether, on the ground that their evolution is so gradual that if we could' see all the stages it would be impossible to say when the manifesta- tion of the old specific form ceased and that of the new one began. But surely it is no approach to a reason against the existence of a thing that we cannot determine the ex- act moment of its first manifestation. When watching " dissolving views," who can tell, while closely observing the gradual changes, exactly at what moment a new pic- ture, say St. Mark's, Venice, can be said to have com- menced its manifestation, or have begun to dominate a preceding representation of " Dotheboys Hall ? " That, however, is no reason for denying the complete difference 13 290 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. between the two pictures and the ideas they respectively embody. The notion of a special nature, a peculiar innate power and activity — what the scholastics called a "substantial form " — will be distasteful to many. The objection to the notion seems, however, to be a futile one, for it is absolute- ly impossible to altogether avoid such a conception and such an assumption. If we refuse it to the individuals which embody the species, we must admit it as regards their component parts — nay, even if we accept the hypoth- esis of pangenesis, we are nevertheless compelled to at- tribute to each gemmule that peculiar power of reproducing its own nature (its own "substantial form"), with its spe- cial activity, and that remarkable power of annexing itself to certain other well-defined gemmules whose nature it is also to plant themselves in a certain definite vicinity. So that in each individual, instead of one such peculiar power and activity dominating and controlling all the parts, you have an infinity of separate powers and activities limited to the several minute component gemmules. It is possible that, in some minds, the notion may lurk that such powers are simpler and easier to understand, be- canse the bodies they affect are so minute ! This absurdity hardly bears stating. We can easily conceive a being so small, that a gemmule would be to it as large as St. Paul's would be to us. Admitting, then, the existence of species, and of then- successive evolution, is there any thing in these ideas hostile to Christian beh'ef ? Writers such as Vogt and Buchner will of course con- tend that there is; but naturalists, generally, assume that God acts in and by the various laws of Nature. And this is equivalent to admitting the doctrine of " derivative cre- ation." With very few exceptions, none deny such Divine concurrence. Even "design" arid "purpose" are recog- XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 291 nized as quite compatible with evolution, and even with the special " nebular " and Darwinian forms of it. Prof. Huxley well says,44 " It is necessary to remark that there is a wider teleology, which is not touched by the doctrine of evolution, but is actually based upon the fundamental proposition of evolution." ..." The teleological and the mechanical views of Nature are not necessarily mutually exclusive; on the contrary, the more purely a mechanist the speculator is, the more firmly does he assume a primordial molecular arrange- ment, of which all the phenomena of the universe are the consequences ; and the more completely thereby is he at the mercy of the teleologist, who can always defy him to dis- prove that this primordial molecular arrangement was not intended to evolve the phenomena of the universe." 46 Prof. Owen says that natural evolution, through second- ary causes, " by means of slow physical and organic opera- tions through long ages, is not the less clearly recognizable as the act of all adaptive mind, because we have abandoned the old error of supposing it to be the result 4B of a primary, direct, and sudden act of creational construction." ..." The succession of species by continuously-operating law is not necessarily a 'blind operation.' Such law however dis- cerned in the properties and successions of natural objects, intimates, nevertheless, a preconceived progress. Organ- isms may be evolved in orderly succession, stage after stage, toward a foreseen goal, and the broad features of the course may still show the unmistakable impress of Divine volition." 44 See The Academy for October, 1869, No. 1, p. 13. 45 Prof. Huxley goes on to say that the mechanist may, in turn, de- mand of the teleologist how the latter knows it was so intended. To this it may be replied he knows it as a necessary truth of reason deduced from his own primary intuitions, which intuitions cannot be questioned without absolute skepticism. 46 The professor doubtless means the direct and immediate result. (See Trans. Zool. Soc., vol. v., p. 90.) 292 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. {CHAP. Mr. Wallace *7 declares that the opponents of evolution present a less elevated view of the Almighty. He says : " Why should we suppose the machine too complicated to have been designed by the Creator so complete that it would necessarily work out harmonious results ? The theory of ' continual interference ' is a limitation of the Cre- ator's power. It assumes that He could not work by pure law in the organic, as He has done in the inorganic world." Thus, then, there is not only no necessary antagonism be- tween the general theory of " evolution " and a Divine ac- tion, but the compatibility between the two is recognized by naturalists who cannot be suspected of any strong theo- logical bias. The very same may be said as to the special Darwinian form of the theory of evolution. It is true Mr. Darwin writes sometimes as if he thought that his theory militated against even derivative creation.*9 This, however, there is no doubt, was not really meant ; and indeed, in the passage before quoted and criticised, the possibility of the Divine ordination of each variation is spoken of as a tenable view. He says (" Origin of Species," p. 569) : "I see no good reason why the views given in this volume should shock the religious feelings of any one ; " and he speaks of life " having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one," which is more than the dogma of creation actually requires. We find, then, that no ^^compatibility is asserted (by any scientific writers wor- 47 " Natural Selection," p. 280. 48 Dr. Asa Gray, e. g., has thus understood Mr. Darwin. The doctor says in his pamphlet, p. 38 : " Mr. Darwin uses expressions which imply that the natural forms which surround us, because they have a history or natural sequence, could have been only generally, but not particularly designed — a view at once superficial and contradictory; whereas his true line should be, that his hypothesis concerns the order and not the cause, the how and not the why of the phenomena, and so leaves the question of design just where it was before." XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 293 thy of mention) between " evolution " and the cooperation of the Divine will; while the same "evolution" has been shown to be thoroughly acceptable to the most orthodox theologians who repudiate the intrusion of the supernatural into the domain of Nature. A more complete harmony could scarcely be desired. But, if we may never hope to find, in physical Nature, evidence of supernatural action, what sort of action might we expect to find there, looking at it from a theistic point of view ? Surely an action the results of which harmonize with man's reason,49 which is orderly, which disaccords with the action of blind chance and with the " fortuitious con- course of atoms " of Democritus ; but at the same time an action which, as to its modes, ever, in parts, and in ultimate analysis, eludes our grasp, and the modes of which are dif- ferent from those by which we should have attempted to accomplish such ends. Now, this is just what we do find. The harmony, the beauty, and the order of the physical universe are the themes of continual panegyrics on the part of naturalists, and Mr. Darwin, as the Duke of Argyll remarks,6* " exhausts every form of words and of illustration by which intention or men- tal purpose can be described," " when speaking of the won- derfully complex adjustments to secure the fertilization of orchids. Also, we find coexisting with this harmony a mode of proceeding so different from that of man as (the direct supernatural action eluding us) to form a stumbling- 49 " All science is but the partial reflection, in the reason of man, of the great all-pervading reason of the universe. And the unity of science is the reflection of the unity of Nature and of the unity of that supreme reason and intelligence which pervades and rules over Nature, and from whence all reason and all science is derived." (Rev. Baden Powell, " Unity of the Sciences,'' Essay i., § ii., p. 81.) 50 " The I&ign of Law," p. 40. 5 Though Mr. Darwin's epithets denoting design are metaphorical, his admiration of the result is unequivocal, nay, enthusiastic ! 294 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. block to many in the way of their recognition of Divine ac- tion at all : although nothing can be more inconsistent than to speak of the first cause as utterly inscrutable and incom- prehensible, and at the same time to expect to find traces of a mode of action exactly similar to our own. It is surely enough if the results harmonize on the whole and prepon- deratingly with the rational, moral, and aesthetic instincts of man. Mr. J. J. Murphy M has brought strongly forward the evidence of " intelligence " throughout organic Nature. He believes " that there is something in organic progress which mere " Natural Selection " among spontaneous variations will not account for," and that " this something is that organ- izing intelligence which guides the action of the inorganic forces, and forms structures which neither " Natural Selec- tion " nor any other unintelligent agency could form." This intelligence, however, Mr. Murphy considers may be unconscious, a conception which it is exceedingly diffi- cult to understand, and which to many minds appears to be little less than a contradiction in terms ; the very first con- dition of an intelligence being that, if it knows any thing, it should at least know its own existence. Surely the evidence from physical facts agrees well with the overruling, concurrent action of God in the order of Nature ; which is no miraculous action, but the operation of laws which owe their foundation, institution, and main- tenance, to an omniscient Creator of whose intelligence our own is a feeble adumbration, inasmuch as it is created in the " image " and " likeness " of its Maker. This leads to the final consideration, a difficulty by no means to be passed over in silence, namely the . ORIGIN OF MAN. To the general theory of Evolution, and to the spe- cial Darwinian form of it, no exception, it has been shown, 52 See " Habit and Intelligence," vol. i., p. 348. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 295 need be taken on the ground of orthodoxy. But, in saying this, it has not been meant to include the soul of man. It is a generally-received doctrine that the soul of every individual man is absolutely created in the strict and pri- mary sense of the word, that it is produced by a direct or supernatural s3 act, and, of course, that by such an act the soul of the frst man was similarly created. It is there- fore important to inquire whether " evolution " conflicts with this doctrine. Now, the two beliefs are in fact perfectly compatible, and that either on the hypothesis — 1. That man's body was created in a manner different in kind from that by which the bodies of other animals were created ; or 2. That it was created in a similar manner to theirs. One of the authors of the Darwinian theory, indeed, con- tends that, even as regards man's body, an action took place different from that by which brute forms were evolved. Mr. Wallace " considers that " Natural Selection " alone could not have produced so large a brain in the* savage, in possessing which he is furnished with an organ beyond his needs. Also that it could not have produced that peculiar distribution of hair, especially the nakedness of the back, which is common to all races of men, nor the peculiar con- struction of the feet and hands. He says," after speaking of the prehensile foot, common without a single exception to all the apes and lemurs, " It is difficult to see why the prehensile power should have been taken away " by the mere operation of " Natural Selection." " It must certainly have been useful in climbing, and the case of the ba- boons shows that it is quite compatible with terrestrial locomotion. It may not be compatible with perfectly easy 63 The term, as before said, not being used in its ordinary theological sense, but to denote an immediate Divine action as distinguished from God's action through the powers conferred on the physical universe. 54 See " Natural Selection/' pp. 332-360. K Loc. cit., p. 349. 296 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAI-. erect locomotion ; but, then, how can we conceive that early man, as. an animal, gained any thing by purely erect loco- motion ? Again, the hand of man contains . latent capaci- ties and powers which are unused by savages, and must have been even less used by paleolithic man and his still ruder predecessors. It has all the appearance of an organ prepared for the use of civilized man, and one which was required to render civilization possible." Again, speaking of the " wonderful power, range, flexibility, and sweetness of the musical sounds producible by the human larynx," he adds : " The habits of savages give no indication of how this faculty could have been developed by Natural Selection ; because it is never required or used by them. The singing of savages is a more or less monotonous howling, and the females seldom sing at all. Savages certainly never choose their wives for fine voices, but for rude health, and strength, and physical beauty. Sexual selection could not therefore have developed this wonderful power, which only comes into play among civilized people. It seems as if the organ had been prepared in anticipation of the future progress of man, since it contains latent capacities which are useless to him in his earlier condition. The delicate correlations of structure that give it such marvellous powers, could not therefore have been acquired by means of Natural Selection." To this may be added the no less wonderful faculty in the ear of appreciating delicate musical tones, and the harmony of chords. It matters not what part of the organ subserves this function, but it has been supposed that it is ministered to by the fibres of Corti.™ Now it can hardly be contended that the preservation of any race of men in the struggle for life could have depended on such an extreme delicacy and 66 See Prof. Huxley's "Lessons in Elementary Physiology," p. 218. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 397 refinement of the internal ear " — a perfection only fully ex- ercised in the enjoyment and appreciation of the most ex- quisite musical performances. Here, surely, we have an in- stance of an organ preformed, ready beforehand for such FIBRES OF COBTL action as could never by itself have been the cause of its development — the action having only been subsequent, not anterior. The author is not aware what may be the" mi- nute structure of the internal ear in the highest apes, but if (as from analogy is probable) it is much as in man, then a fortiori we have an instance of anticipatory development of a most marked and unmistakable kind. And this is not all. There is no reason to suppose that any animal besides man appreciates musical harmony. It is certain that no other one produces it. Mr. Wallace also urges objections drawn from the origin of some of man's mental faculties, such as " the capacity to form ideal conceptions of space and time, of eternity and infinity — the capacity for intense artistic feelings of pleas- ure, in form, color, and composition — and for those abstract notions of form and number which render geometry and 57 It may be objected, perhaps, that excessive delicacy of the ear might have been produced by having to guard against the approach of enemies, some savages being remarkable for their keenness of hearing at great distances. But the perceptions of intensity and quality of sound are very different. Some persons who have an extremely acute ear for delicate sounds, and who are fond of music, have yet an incapacity for detecting whether an instrument is slightly out of tune. 298 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. arithmetic possible," also from the origin of the moral sense.68 The validity of these objections is fully conceded by the author of this book, but he would push it much further, and contend (as has been now repeatedly said) that another law, or other laws, than " Natural Selection " have deter- mined the evolution of all organic forms, and of inorganic forms also. And it must be contended that Mr. "Wallace, in order to be quite self-consistent, should arrive at the very same conclusion, inasmuch as he is inclined to trace all phe- nomena to the action of superhuman WILL. He says : 69 If therefore we have traced one force, however minute, to an origin in our own WILL, while we have no knowledge of any other primary cause of force, it does not seem an improbable conclusion that all force may be will-force ; and thus that the whole universe is not merely dependent on, but actually iSj the WILL of higher intelligences, or of one Supreme In- telligence." If there is really evidence, as Mr. Wallace believes, of the action of an overruling intelligence in the evolution of the " human form divine ; " if we may go so far as this, then surely an analogous action may well be traced in the pro- duction of the horse, the camel, or the dog, so largely iden- tified with human wants and requirements. And if from other than physical considerations we may believe that such action, though undemonstrable, has been and is ; then (reflecting on sensible phenomena the theistic light derived from psychical facts) we may, in the language of Mr. Wal- lace, " see indications of that power in facts which, by them- selves, would not serve to prove its existence." 60 Mr. Murphy, as has been said before, finds it necessary to accept the wide-spread action of " intelligence " as the agent by which all organic forms have been called forth 68 Loc. cit., pp. 351, 352. 59 Loc. cit, p. 368. 60 Loc. cit., p. 350. XII.] THEOLOGY AXD EVOLUTION 299 from the inorganic. But all science tends to unity, and this tendency makes it reasonable to extend to all physical ex- istences a mode of formation which we may have evidence for in any one of them. It therefore makes it reasonable to extend, if possible, the very same agency which we find operating in the field of biology, also to the inorganic world. If on the grounds brought forward the action of intelligence may be affirmed in the production of man's bodily structure, it becomes probable a priori that it may also be predicated of the formative action by which has been produced the ani- mals which minister to him, and all organic life whatsoever. Nay, more, it is then congruous to expect analogous action in the development of crystalline and colloidal structures, and in that of all chemical compositions, in geological evo- lutions, and the formation not only of this earth, but of the solar system and whole sidereal universe. If such really be the direction in which physical science, philosophically considered, points ; if intelligence may thus be seen to preside over the evolution of each system of worlds and the unfolding of every blade of grass — this grand result harmonizes indeed with the teachings of faith that God acts and concurs, in the natural order, with those laws of the material universe which were not only instituted by His will, but are sustained by His concurrence ; and we are thus enabled to discern in the natural order, however darkly, the Divine Author of Nature — Him in whom " we live, and move, and have our being." But if this view is accepted, then it is no longer abso- lutely necessary to suppose that any action different in kind took place in the production of man's body, from that which took place in the production of the bodies of other animals, and of the whole material universe. Of course, if it can be demonstrated that that difference which Mr. Wallace asserts really exists, it is plain that we 300 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. then have to do with facts not only harmonizing with re- ligion, but, as it were, preaching and proclaiming it. It is not, however, necessary for Christianity that any such view should prevail. Man, according to the old scho- lastic definition, is " a rational animal " (animal rationale) , and his animality is distinct in nature from his rationality, though inseparably joined, during life, in one common per- sonality. This animal body must have had a different source from that of the spiritual soul which informs it, from the distinctness of the two orders to which those two ex- istences severally belong. Scripture seems plainly to indicate this when it says that " God made man from the dust of the earth, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life." This is a plain and direct statement that man's body was not created in the primary and absolute sense of the word, but was evolved from preexisting material (symbolized by the term " dust of the earth"), and was therefore only derivatively created, i. e., by the operation of secondary laws. His soul, on the other hand, was created in quite a different way, not by any preexisting means, external to God Himself, but by the direct action of the Almighty, symbolized by the term " breathing : " the very form adopted by Christ, when con- ferring the supernatural powers and graces of the Christian dispensation, and a form still daily used in the rites and ceremonies of the Church. That the first man should have had this double origin agrees with what we now experience. For supposing each human soul to be directly and immediately created, yet each human body is evolved by the ordinary operation of natural physical laws. Prof. Flower, in his Introductory Lecture 61 (p. 20) to his course of Hunterian Lectures for 1870, well observes : " Whatever man's place may be, either in or out of Nature, 6S Published by John Churchill. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 301 whatever hopes, or fears, or feelings about himself or his race he may have, we all of us admit that these are quite uninfluenced by our knowledge of the fact that each indi- vidual man comes into the world by the ordinary processes of generation, according to the same laws which apply to the development of all organic beings whatever, that every part of him which can come under the scrutiny of the anat- omist or naturalist, has been evolved according to these regular laws from a simple minute ovum, indistinguishable to our senses from that of any of the inferior animals. If this be so — if man is what he is, notwithstanding the cor- poreal mode of origin of the individual man, so he will as- suredly be neither less nor more than man, whatever may be shown regarding the corporeal origin of the whole race, whether this was from the dust of the earth, or by the modi- fication of some preexisting animal form." Man is indeed compound, in him two distinct orders of being impinge and mingle ; and with this an origin from two concurrent modes of action is congruous, and might be expected a priori. At the same time as the " soul " is " the form of the body," the former might be expected to modify the latter into a structure of harmony and beauty standing alone in the organic world of Nature. Also that, with the full perfection and beauty of that soul, attained by the concurrent action of " Nature " and " Grace," a char- acter would be formed like nothing else which is visible in this world, and having a mode of action different, inas- much as complementary to all inferior modes of action. Something of this is evident even to those who approach the subject from the point of view of physical science only. Thus Mr. Wallace observes,63 that on his view man is to be placed " apart," as not only the head and culminating point of the grand series of organic Nature, but as in some degree a new and distinct order of being.™ From those infinitely 62 Natural Selection, p. 324. « The italics are not Mr. Wallace's. 302 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. remote ages when the first rudiments of organic life ap- peared upon the earth, every plant and every animal has been subject to one great law of physical change. As the earth has gone through its grand cycles of geological, cli- matal, and organic progress, every form of life has been subject to its irresistible action, and has been continually but imperceptibly moulded into such new shapes as would preserve their harmony with the ever-changing universe. No living thing could escape this law of its being ; none (except, perhaps, the simplest and most rudimentary organ- isms) could remain unchanged and live amid the universal change around it." " At length, however, there came into existence a being in whom that subtle force we term mind, became of greater importance than his mere bodily structure. Though with a naked and unprotected body, this gave him clothing against the varying inclemencies of the seasons. Though unable to compete with the deer in swiftness, or with the wild- bull in strength, this gave him weapons with which to cap- ture or overcome both. Though less capable than most other animals of living on the herbs and the fruits that un- aided Nature supplies, this wenderful faculty taught him to govern and direct Nature to his own benefit, and make her produce food for him when and where he pleased. From the moment when the first skin wras used as a covering ; when the first rude spear was formed to assist in the chase ; when fire was first used to cook his food ; when the first seed was'sowii or shoot planted, a grand revolution was effected in Nature, a revolution which in all the previous ages of the earth's history had had no parallel, for a being had arisen who was no longer necessarily subject to change with the changing universe, a being who was in some degree superior to Nature, inasmuch as he knew how to control and regulate her action, and could keep himself in harmony with her, not by a change in body, but by an ad- vance in mind." XII.] THEOLOGY AXD EVOLUTION. 303 " On this view of his special attributes, we may admit ' that he is indeed a being apart.' Man has not only escaped ' Natural Selection ' himself, but he is actually able to take away some of that power from Nature which before his ap- pearance she universally exercised. We can anticipate the time when the earth will produce only cultivated plants and domestic animals ; when man's selection shall have sup- planted { Natural Selection ; ' and when the ocean will be the only domain in which that power can be exerted." Baden Powell "* observes on this subject : " The relation of the animal man to the intellectual, moral, and spiritual man, resembles that of a crystal slumbering in its native quarry to the same crystal mounted in the polarizing appa- ratus of the philosopher. The difference is not in physical Nature, but in investing that Nature with a new and higher application. Its continuity with the material world remains the same, but a new relation is developed in it, and it claims kindred with ethereal matter and with celestial light." This well expresses the distinction between the merely physical and the hyperphysical natures of man, and the sub- sumption of the former into the latter which dominates it. The same author hi speaking of man's moral and spiritual nature says,68 " The assertion in its very nature and essence refers wholly to a DIFFERENT ORDER OF THINGS, apart from and transcending any material ideas whatsoever." Again M he adds, " In proportion as man's moral superiority is held to consist in attributes not of a material or corporeal kind or origin, it can signify little how his physical nature may , have originated." Now physical science, as such, has nothing to do with the soul of man, which is hyperphysical. That such an en- tity exists, that the correlated physical forces go through their Protean transformations, have their persistent ebb and 64 " Unity of Worlds," Essay ii., § ii., p. 247. w Ibid., Essay L, § ii., p. 76. 66 Ibid., Essay iii., § iv., p. 466. 304 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. flow outside of the world of WILL and SELF-CONSCIOUS MOKAL BEING, are propositions the proofs of which have no place in this work. This at least may however be confi- dently affirmed, that no reach of physical science in any coming century will ever approach to a demonstration that countless modes of being, as different from each other as are the force of gravitation and conscious maternal love, may not coexist. Two such modes are made known to us by our natural faculties only : the physical, which includes the first of these examples ; the hyperphysical, which em- braces the other. For those who accept revelation, a third and a distinct mode of being and of action is also made known, namely, the direct and immediate, or, in the sense here given to the term, the supernatural. An analogous re- lationship runs through and connects all these modes of being and of action. The higher mode in each case em- ploys and makes use of the lower, the action of which it occasionally suspends or alters, as gravity is suspended by electro-magnetic action, or the living energy of an organic being restrains the inter-actions of the chemical affinities belonging to its various constituents. Thus conscious will controls and directs the exercise of the vital functions according to desire, and moral conscious- ness tends to control desire in obedience to higher dictates.67 67 A good exposition of how an inferior action has to yield to one higher is given by Dr. Newman in his " Lectures on University Subjects," p. 372. " What is true in one science, is dictated to us indeed according to that science, but not according to another science, or in another de- partment. " What is certain in the military art, has force in the military art, but not in statesmanship ; and if statesmanship be a higher department of action than war, and enjoins the contrary, it has no force on our re- ception and obedience at all. And so what is true in medical science, might in all cases be carried out, were man a mere animal or brute with- out a soul ; but since he is a rational, responsible being, a thing may be ever so true in medicine, yet may be unlawful in fact, in consequence of XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 3Q5 The action of living organisms depends upon and subsumes the laws of inorganic matter. Similarly the actions of ani- mal life depend upon and subsume the laws of organic mat- ter. In the same way the actions of a self-conscious moral agent, such as man, depend upon and subsume the laws of animal life. When a part or the whole series of these natu- ral actions is alcered or suspended by the intervention of action of a still higher order, we have then a " miracle." In this way we find a perfect harmony in the double na- ture of man, his rationality making use of and subsuming his animality ; his soul arising from direct and immediate creation, and his body being formed at first (as now in each separate individual) by derivative or secondary creation, through natural laws. By such secondary creation, i. e., by natural laws, for the most part as yet unknown but con- trolled by " Natural Selection," all the various kinds of ani- mals and plants have been manifested on this planet. That Divine action has concurred and concurs in these laws we know by deductions from our primary intuitions ; and phys- ical science, if unable to demonstrate such action, is at least as impotent to disprove it. Disjoined from these deduc- tions, the phenomena of the universe present an aspect de- void of all that appeals to the loftiest aspirations of man, that which stimulates his efforts after goodness, and pre- sents consolations for unavoidable shortcomings. Conjoined with these same deductions, all the harmony of physical Na- ture and the constancy of its laws are preserved unimpaired, while the reason, the conscience, and the aesthetic instincts, are alike gratified. We have thus a true reconciliation of science and religion, in which each gains and neither loses, one being complementary to the other. Some apology is due to the reader for certain observa- tions and arguments which have been here advanced, and the higher law of morals and religion coming to some different conclu- sion." 306 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES. [CHAP. which have little in the shape of novelty to recommend them. But, after all, novelty can hardly be predicated of the views here criticised and opposed. Some of these seem almost a return to the "fortuitous concourse of atoms" of Democritus, and even the very theory of " Natural Se- lection" itself — a "survival of the fittest" — was in part thought out not hundreds but thousands of years ago. Op- ponents of Aristotle maintained that by the accidental oc- currence of combinations, organisms have been preserved and perpetuated such as final causes, did they exist, would have brought about, disadvantageous combinations or vari- ations being speedily exterminated. " For when the very same combinations happened to be produced which the law of final causes would have called into being, those combina- tions which proved to be advantageous to the organism were preserved ; while those which were not advantageous perished, and still perished like the minotaurs and sphinxes of Empedocles."68 In conclusion, the author ventures to hope that this treatise may not be deemed useless, but have contributed, however slightly, toward clearing the way for peace and conciliation, and for a more ready perception of the harmony which exists between those deductions from our primary intuitions before alluded to, and the teachings of physical science, as far, that is, as concerns the evolution of organic forms — the genesis of species. The aim has been to support the doctrine that these species have been evolved by ordinary natural laws (for the most part unknown) controlled by the subordinate action of " Natural Selection," and at the same time to remind 68 Quoted from the RamUer of March, 1860, p. 364 : ""OTTOU pkv ovv airavTa o"we/3rj, &cnrep K$I/ et eVe/ca Toy eytvero, ravra jj.\v eVciflr; a?ro TOO avTOfj-tirov ffvffTdvTa. e7TJT7j5eia>s, ocra. 5e p.)] o'drtas airi&Xero Kal cwro'AAuTai, KaOdwep *E[JLireSoK\i)s \eyei TO. £oyyej/5j Kal wtipoirpupa." — ARIST. Phys.t ii. C. 8. XII.] THEOLOGY AND EVOLUTION. 307 some that there is and can be absolutely nothing in physi- cal science which forbids them to regard those natural laws as acting with the Divine concurrence and in obedience to a creative fiat originally imposed on the primeval Cosmos, " in the beginning," by its Creator, its Upholder, and its Lord. INDEX. A. AAED-VAEK, 189. Absolute creation, 269. Acanthometrae, 201. Acrodont teeth, 162. Acts formerly moral, 210. Acts materially moral, 210. Adductor muscles, 92. Agassiz, Prof., 288. Aged, care of, 206. Aggregational theory, 177. Algoa Bay, cat of; 112. Allantois, 95. Amazons, butterflies of, 99. Amazons, cholera in the, 206. American butterflies, 41. American maize, 114. American monkeys, 241. Amiurus, 161. Amphibia, 123. Analogical relations, 171. Ancou sheep, 114, 117, 242. Andrew Murray, Mr., 96. Angora cats, 190. Animal's sufferings, 277. Ankle bones, 172. Annelids undergoing fission, 183, 226. Annulosa, eye of, 90. Anoplotherium, 124. Anteater, 97. Antechinus, 95. Antenna, of orchid, 69. Anthropomorphism, 274. Ape's sexual characters, 61. Apostles' Creed, 260. Appendages of lobster, 175. Appendages of Normandy pigs, 113. Appendages of turkey, 114. Appendix, vermiform, 96. Appreciation of Mr. Darwin, 22. Apteryx, 19, 83. Aqueous humor, 89. Aquinas, St. Thomas, 30, 280, 282. Archegosaurus, 149. Archeopteryx, 86. Arcturus, 207. Argyll, Duke o$ 27, 293. Aristotle, 806. Armadillo, extinct kind, 124. Arthritis, rheumatic, 197. Artiodactyle foot, 124. Asa Gray, Dr., 270. 272, 277. Asceticism, 207. Ascidians, placental structure, 93. Assumptions of Mr. Darwin, 28. Astronomical objections, 150. Auditory organ, 86. Augustine, St., 30, 281. Aurelius, Marcus, 221. Avian limb, 121. Avicularia, 93. Axolotl, 179. Aye-Aye, 122. Aylesbury ducks, 249. B. BACKBONE, 149, 176. Bacon, Koger, 283. Baleen, 54. Bamboo insect, 45. Bandicoot, 80. Bartlett, Mr. A. D., 140, 249. Bartlett, Mr. E., 206. Basil, St., 30. Bastian, Dr. H. Charlton, 129, 234, 253, 283. Bat, wing of, 77. Bates, Mr., 41, 98, 101. Bats, 123. Beaks, 96. Beasts, sufferings of, 260. Beauty of shell-fish, 67. Bee orchid, 68. Bird, wings of, 77. Birds compared with reptiles, 83. Bird's-head processes, 90. Birds of Paradise, 104. Birth of individual and species, 14. Bivalves, 92. Black sheep, 136. Black-shouldered peacock, 114. Bladebone, 83. Blood-vessels, 196. IXDEX. 309 Blyth, Mr., 114, 195. Bones of skull 167. Bonnet, M.. 232. Berwick, Mr., 212. '• Boots " of pigeons, 195. Breathing, modified power of, 113. Breeding of lions, 249. Brill, 49. B roccoli, variety of, 114. Bryozoa, 93. Buchner, Dr., 290. Budd, Dr. W., 193. Buffon, 232. Bull-dog's instinct, 276. Burt, Prof. Wilder, 195, 198. Butterflies, 41. Butterflies, Amazonian, 99. Butterflies, American, 41. Butterflies of Indian region, 97. Butterflies, tails of, 99. Butterfly, Leaf, 43, C. CACOTCS, 163. Caecum, 96. Calamaries, 90. Cambrian deposits, 151. Cape ant-eater, 1S9. Care of aged, 206. Carinate birds, 83. Carnivora, 81. Carnivorous dentition, 124. Carp fishes, 160. Carpal bones. 120. 194. Carpenter, Dr.. 129. Carpus, 192, 193. Cases of conscience, 215. Cassowary. S3. Catasetum, 69. Causes of spread of Darwinism, 22. Cebus, 241. Celebes, butterflies of, 99. Centetes. 162. Centipede, 79, 173. Cephalopoda, 87. Ceroxylus laceratus, 48. Cetacea, 54, 97. 119, 122, 188. Chances against few individuals, 70, Characinidae, 160. Cheirogaleus, 172. Chetahs, 250. Chickens, mortality ol hybrids, 133. Chioglossa, 179. Chiromys. 122. Cholera^ 206. Choroid, 89. Chronic rheumatism, 197. Circumcision, 227. Clarias, 161. Climate, eflects of. 112. Climbing plants. 122. Clock-thinking illustration, 265. Cobra, 62. Cockle, 92. Cod, 51. Colloidal matter, 283. Conceptions, symbolic, 267. Connecticut footsteps, 145. Connecting links, supposed, 122. Conscience, cases of, 215. Conscientious Papuan, 212. Cope, Prof., 84, 144. Coracoid, of birds and reptiles, 84. Cornea, 90. Cornelius a Lapide, 282. Correlation, laws of, 183. Corti, fibres of, 66, 296. Coryanthes, 63. Costa, M., 102. Cranial segments, 186. Creation, 261, 269 Creator, 27, 263. Creed, Apostles', 260. Crocodile, 55. Croll, Mr., 151. Crustacea, 93, 174. Cryptacanthus, 160. Crystalline matter, 233. Crystals of snow, 200. Cuttle-fishes, 87, 88. CuTier, 124. Cyprinoids, 160. Cytheridea, 92. u. DANA, Prof, 163. Darwin, Mr. Charles, 14, 22, 25, 27, S3, 35, 39, 46, 48, 55, 57, 59, 60, 68, 69, 72, 78, 102, 108, 112, 114, 121, 1:33, 140, 143, 152, 156, 159, 164, 165, 195, 202, 204, 211, 223, 224, 229, 232, 233, 237, 243, 250, 263, 270, 274, 275, 292, 293. Datura tatula, 115. Delhi, days at, 112. Delpino, Signer, 227, 228, 230. Democritus. 232, 293, 306. Density of air for breathing, 113. Dentition, carnivorous, 124. Derivation, 254. Derivative creation, 263, 300. Design, 276. Devotion, 207. Dibranchiata, 88. Difficulties of problem of specific origin, 13. Digits, supernumerary, 137, 194. Digits, turtles, 121. Dimorphodon, 84. Dinornis, 83. Dinosauria, 85. Diseased pelvis, 197. Dissemination of seeds, 78. Doris, 184. Dotheboys Hall, 289. Dragon, the flying, 77, 172. Dragon-fly, 91. Droughts!! 37. Duck-billed platypus, 189. Dugong. 54, 190. Duke of Argyll, 27, 293. Dyspepsia, 215. 310 INDEX. EAR, 87. Ear, formation of, 63. Early specialization, 125. Echinodermata, 56. Echinoidea, 56. Eehinops, 162. Echinorhinus, 186. Echinus, 55. Economy, Fuegian political, 206. Eczema, 197. Edentata, 183. Egyptian monuments, 152. Elasmobranchs, 155. Elbow and knee affections, 193. Empedocles, 306. Eocene ungulata, 125. Eolis, 184. Equus, 161. Ericulus, 162. Ethics, 202. Eudes Deslongchamps, 112. Eurypterida, 153, 185. Eutropius, 162. Everett, Kev. R., 112. Evolution requires geometrical increase of time, 153. Eye, 89. Eye, formation of, 64. Eyeoftrilobites, 149. F. FABRE, M., 59. Feather-legged breeds, 196. Feejeeans, 214. Fertilization of orchids, 68. "Fiat justitia, ruat coelum," 209. Fibres of Corti, 66, 296. Final misery, 208. Finger of Potto, 119. Fish, flying, 77. Fishes, fresh-water, 159. Fishes, thoracic and jugular, 51, 155. Fixity of position of limbs, 51. Flat-fishes, 49, 180. Flexibility of bodily organization, degrees of, 133. Flexibility of mind, 284. Flies, horned, 107. Flight of spiders, 78. Flounder, 50. Flower, Prof., 178, 248, 300. Fly, orchid, 68. Flying-dragon, 77, 172. Flying-fish, 77. Foetal teeth of whales, 19. Food, effects on pigs, 113. Footsteps of Connecticut, 145. Foraminifera, 200. Formally moral acts, 210. Formation of eye and ear, 64. Forms, substantial, 200, 290. Four-gilled Cephalopoda, 89. Fowls, white silk, 136. French theatrical audience, 213. Fresh-water fishes, 159. Frogs, Chilian and European, 163. Fuego, Terra del, 206. O. GALAGO, 172. Galaxias, 161. Galeus vulgaris, 186. Galton, Mr. F., Ill, 127, 244. Gascoyen, Mr., 196. Gaviafs, 55. Gegenbaur, Prof., 190, 193. Gemmules, 223. Generative system, its sensitiveness, 250. Genesis of morals, 216. Geographical distribution, 158. Geographical distribution explained by Nat- ural Selection, 18. Geometrical increments of time, 153. Geotria, 161. Giraffe, neck of, 36. Gizzard-like stomach, 96. Glacial epoch, 164. Glyptodon, 124. Godron, Dr., 115. Goose, its inflexibility, 133. Goppert, Mr., 115. Gould, Mr., 102. Grasshopper, Great Shielded, 103 Gray, Dr. Asa, 270, 272, 277. Great Ant-eater, 116. Great Salamander, 186. Great Shielded Grasshopper, 103. Greyhounds in Mexico, 113. Greyhounds, time for evolution of, 152. Guinea-fowl, 134. Guinea-pig, 140. Gunther, Dr., 159, 160, 186. H. HAIRLESS DOGS, 188, 190. Hamilton, Sir William, 267. Harmony, musical, 66, 296. Heart in birds and reptiles, 172. Hegel, 232. Heliconida?, 41. Hell, 208. Heptanchus, 186. Herbert Spencer, Mr., 33, 40, 80, 86, 117, 180, 182, 184, 186, 199, 203, 216, 217, 219, 233, 243, 261, 262, 264, 267. Hessian flies, 184. Heterobranchus, 160. Hewitt, Mr., 138, 195. Hexanchus, 186. Hipparion, 111, 148. Homogeny, 172. Homology, bilateral or lateral, 170, 178. Homology, meaning of term, 19, 170. Homology, serial, 173. Homology, vertical, 179. Homoplasy, 173. Honey-suckers, 104. IXDEX. 311 Hood of cobra, 62. Hook-billed ducks, 114. Hooker, Dr., 164. Horned flies, 107. Horny plates, 53, 54. Horny stomach, 96. Human larynx, 67, 296. Humphrv. 'ProL 177. Hutton, Mr. E. Holt, 216, 21.. Huxlev, Prof., SO. 82, 84, 85, 103, 117, 123, 144, '145, 151, 155. 177, 186, 187, 246, 263. Hybrids, mortality of 133. Hydrocyonina, 160. Hyperphysical action, 269. Hyrax, 193. IcirnrropsrDA, 123. Ichthyosaurus, 92, 120, 146, 191. Ichthyosis, 193. Iguanodon, 84. Illegitimate symbolic conceptions, 267. Illustration by clock-thinking, 265. Imairinal disks, 53, 134. Implacental mammals, 81, 82. Independent origins, 167. Indian butterfly. 43. Indian region's butterflies, 96. Indians and cholera, 206. Individual, meaning of word, 14. Infirm, care of, 206. Influence, local, 96. Insect, walking-leaf, 45. Insects, walking-stick and bamboo, 45. Insectivora. SI. Insectivorous mammals, 162. Insectivorous teeth, 81. Instinct of bull-dog, 276. Intermediate forms, 142. Intuitions, primary, 267. Irregularities in blood-vessels, 196. Isaria felina, 130. JAPAX>~EI> PEACOCK, 114. Jews, -227. Joints of backbone. 171, 176. Jugular fishes, 51. 155. Julia Pastrana, !>•>. KALLIMA IXACHIS, 44. KalJima paralekta, 44. Kangaroo, 54, 80. Kowalewsky, 95. Knee and elbow affections, 197. KSlliker, Prof, 113. IM LABTRTNTinCI, 160. Labyrinthodon, 113, 133. Lamarck, 15. Lankester, Mr. Eay, 167, 172. Larynx of kangaroo, 55. Larynx of man, 67, 296. Lateral homology, 178. Laws of correlation, 188. Leaf butterfly, 43. Legitimate symbolic conceptions, 26T. Lens, 90. Lepidosteus, 136. Lepra, 197. Lewes, Mr. G. H., 103, 227, 229, 232. Louis, St, 221. Louis XV., 220. Louis XVI., 220. Limb genesis, 190. Limb muscles, 194. Limbs, fixity of position of, 51. Iambs of lobster, 175. Links, supposed connecting, 122. Lions, breeding, 249. Lions, diseased pelvis, 196. Llama, 123. Local influences, 97. Lobster, 174. Long-tailed bird of Paradise, 105. Lubbock, Sir John, 212, 219. Lyell, Sir Charles, on dogs, 113, 120. OT. MACHAIEODrS, 124. Macrauchenia, 124. Macropodidae, 82. Macroscelides, 82. Madagascar, 162, 1€6. Magnificent bird of Paradise, 106. Maize, American, 114. Mammals, 30. Mammary gland of kangaroo. 54. Mammary gland, origin of, 60. Man, origin o£ -77. Man reveals God, 267. Man, voice of, 66. Manatee, 54, 190. Manchamp breed of sheep, 114. Manis,189. Man's larynx, 67. Many simultaneous modifications, 69. Marcus Aurelius. 221. Martineau, Mr. James, 214, 261. Mastacembelus, 159. Materially moral acts, 210. Matter, crystalline and colloidal. 2S3. Meaning o'f word u individual" 14. Meaning of word "species." 14. Mechanical theory of spine. 17>. Mediterranean oyster. 102. 112. Meehan, Mr., 102. Mexico, dogs in, 113. MU% John Stuart, 23, 203, 207. ~2-i>. Mimicry. 20, 41. Miracle, 305. Molars. 124. Mole, 190. Moliere, 245. Mombas, cats at, 112. 312 INDEX. Monkeys, American, 241. Monster proboscis, 137. Moral acts, 210. Mordacia, 161. Murphy, Mr. J. J., 64, 66, 90, 11T, 128, 129, 151, 200, 236, 294, 25)9. Murray, Mr. Andrew, 96. Mus delicatulus, 96. Muscles of limbs, 194. Mussel, 92. Myrmecophaga, 96. N. NASALIS. SEMNOPITHECTJS, 153. Nathusius, 113. Natural Selection, shortly stated, 17. Naudin, M. C., 115. Nautilus, 89. Nebular evolution, 291. Neck of giraffe, 36. Newman, the Eev. Dr., 271, 2S5, 287, 304. New Zealand Crustacea, 164. New Zealand fishes, 161. Niata, cattle, 114. Nile fishes, 160. Normandy pig, 113. North American fish, 161. Nycticebus, 193. O. OBJECT of book, 17. Objections from astronomy, 150. Octopods, 90. Offensive remarks of Prof. Yogt, 25. Old, care of the, 206. Old Fuegian women, 206. Omygena, exigua, 129. Ophiocephalus, 160. Optic lobes of pterodactyls, 84. Orchids, 106. Orchids, Bee, etc., 68. Organ of hearing, 86. Organ of sight, 89. Organic polarities, 200. Origin of man, 294. Orioles, 104. Ornithoptera, 97. Ornithorhynchus, 189. Orthoceratidae, 184, Orycteropus, 189. Ostracods, 92. Ostrich, 83. Otoliths, 87. Outlines of butterflies1 wings, 100. Owen, Prof., 88, 116, 137, 233, 254, 291. Oyster of Mediterranean, 102, 112. Oysters, 92. P. PAGET, Mr. J., 197. Palseotherium, 124. Pallas, 140. Fangenesis, 31, 223. Pangolin, 190. Papilio Hospiton, 99. Papilio Machaon, 99. Papilio Ulysses, 98. Papilionidse, 97. Papuan morals, 212. Parthenogenesis, 233. Passiflora gracilis, 121. Pastrana, Julia, 188, Pathological polarities, 199. Pavo nigripennis 114. Peacock, black-shouldered, 114, Peacock inflexibility of, 133. Pedicellariae, 57. Pelvis, diseased, 197. Pendulous appendages of turkey, 114. Perameles, 81. Periophthalmus, 160. Perissodactyl ungulates, 124. Permian, jugular fish, 155. Perodicticus, 119, 193. Phalangers, 80. Phasmidse, 103. Phyllopods, 93. Physical actions, 269. "Physiological units," 182, 234. Pigeons1 "boots," 195. Placental mammals, 81. Placental reproduction, 95. Plants, tendrils of, 121. Plates of baleen, 53. Platypus, 189. Pleiades, 207. Plesiosaurus, 120, 147, 192. Pleurodont dentition, 162. Pleuronectidae, 49, ISO. Plotosus, 161. Poisoning apparatus, 69. Poisonous serpents, 62. Polarities, organic, 199, 200. Political economy, Fuegiau, 206. Polyzoa, 93, 94. Pompadour, Madame de, 220. Poppy, variety of, 115. Porcupine, 190. Porto Santo rabbit, 114, 136. Potto, 119, 193. Pouched beasts, 80. Powell, the Eev. Baden, 276, 278. 303. Premolars, 124. Prepotency, 138. Primary intuitions, 267. Primitive man, 218. Problem of origin of kinds, 13. Proboscis monkey, 153. Proboscis of ungulates, 137. Processes, bird's-head, 93. Psettus, 160. Psoriasis, 197. Pterodactyls, compared with birds, 83. Pterodactyls, wing of, 77. Puccinia, 129. Purpose, 275. QUASI- VERTEBRAL theory of skull, 186. INDEX. 313 it. RABBIT of Porto Santo, 114, 136. Radial ossicle, 190. Rarefied air, effect on dogs, 113. Rattlesnake, 61. Red bird of Paradise, 106. Relations, analogical, 171. Relations, homological, 170. Reptiles compared with birds, 83. Retrieving, virtue a kind of, 203, 219. Reversion, cases of, 137. Rhea,83. Ribs of Cetacea and Sirenia, 54. Ribs of flying-dragon, 77, 172. Richardson^ figures of pigs, 113. Roger Bacon, 233. Rudimentary structures, 19, 116. S. SABRE-TOOTHED tisrer, 124. 8t Augustine, 30, 2S1, 232. St Basil, 30. St Hilaire, M., 194. St Thomas Aquinas, 30, 230, 232. Salamander, great, 186. Baiter, Mr., 133. Salvia officinalis. 22?. ' Salvia verticillata, 223. Scapula of birds and reptiles, 84. Schreber, 26. Sclerotic, 89. Scorpion, sting of, 79. Seals, 96. Sea-squirts, 95. Seeds, dissemination of, 79. Seely, Mr., on pterodactyls, 84. Segmentation of skull, 187. Segmentation of spine, 186. Segments, similar, 174. Self-existence, 263. Semnopithecus, 153. Sense, organ of, 64, 82, 83, 89. Sensitiveness of generative system, 250. Sepia, 90. Serpents, poisonous, 62. Sexual characters of apes, 61. Sexual selection, 60. Sharks, 96. Shell-fish, beauty of, 67. Shells of oysters, 102, 112. Shielded grasshopper, 102. Silurian strata, 154. 15G. Simultaneous modifications, 69. Sirenia, 54, Sir John Lubbock, 212, 219. Sir William Thomson, 150. Sitaris, 59. Six-shafted bird of Paradise, 104. Skull bones, 167. Skull segments, 187. Sloth, windpipe of, 95. 14 Smithfield, wife-selling in, 213. Snow, crystals of, 200. Sole, 49. Solenodon, 162. Species, meaning of word, 14. Spelerpes, 179. Spencer, see Herbert Spencer. Spider orchid, 68. Spiders, flight of, 78. Spine of Glyptodon, 124. Spine, segmentation of, 186. Sqnalidae, 50. Squilla, 174. Sterility of hybrids, 139. Stings, 79. Straining action of baleen, 54. Struthious birds, 83, 165. Sturgeon, 186. Suarez, 31, 2S1. Substantial forms, 201, 290. Sufferings of beasts, 277. Supernatural action, 269. Supernatural action not to be looked for in Nature, 23. Supernumerary digits, 137, 196. Sylis, 133, 226. Symbolic conceptions, 267. Symmetrical diseases, 197. Syphilitic deposits, 197. T. TADPOLE'S beak, 96. Tails of butterflies, 99. Tapir, 137, 148. Tarsal bones, 173, 212. Teeth of Cetacea, 96. Teeth of insectivora, 81. Teeth of kangaroo and Macroscelides, 82. Teeth of seals, 96. Teeth of sharks, 96. Teleology and evolution compatible. 291. Tendrils of climbing plants, 121. Tenia echinococcus, 134. Teratology, 187. Tetragonopterina, 160. Thomson, Sir William, 150. Thoracic fishes, 51. Thorax of crustaceans, 93. Thylacine, 80. Tierra del Fuego, 206. Tiger, sabre-toothed, 124. Time required for evolution, 142. Tope, 186. Trabeculae cranii, 186. Transitional forms, 142. Transmutationism, 257. Trevelyan, Sir .T. Peacock, 114. Trilobites, 149, 155, 185. Tunicaries, 95. Turbot, 49. Turkey, effects of climate on, 114. Turkish dog, 57. Two-gilled cephalopoda, 89. Type, conformity to, 257. 314 UMBILICAL vesicle, 95. TTngulata, 87, 123. Ungulata eocene, 124. Units, physiological, 182, 234. Unknowable, the, 261. Upper Silurian strata, 154, 156. Urotrichus, 81. V. VARIABILITY, different degrees of, 133. Vermiform appendix, 96. Vertebra of skull, 186. Vertebral column, 176, 185. Vertebrate limbs, 50, 177. Vertical homology, 179. Vesicle, umbilical, 95. "Vestiges of Creation," 15. View here advocated, 17. Vitreous humor, 89. Vogt, Prof., 25, 290. Voice of man, 67. Voltaire, 245. TW. WAGNER, J. A., 26. Wagner, Nicholas, 184. Walking leaf, 48. Walking-stick insect, 45. INDEX. Wallace, Mr. Alfred, 14, 22, 38, 41, 42 43, 48 67, 97, 98, 100, 103, 117, 131, 205, 212, 241, 292, 297, 302. Weaver fishes, 51. Weitbrecht, 195. Whale, fcetal teeth of, 19. Whale, mouth of; 53. Whalebone, 53. Whales. 92. White silk fowls, 136." Wife-selling, 213. Wild animals, their variability, 135. Wilder, Prof. Burt, 195, 198. Windpipe, 95. Wings of bats, birds, and pterodactyls, 77, 144. Wings of birds, origin of, 120. Wings of butterflies, outline of, 100. Wings of flying-dragon, 77, 172. Wings of humming-bird, 171. Wings of humming-bird hawk moth, 171. Wings of insects, 78. Wombat, 96. Women, old Fuegian, 206. Worms undergoing fission, 184, 226. Wyman, Dr. Jeffries, 199. Y. YOEK MINSTER, a Fuegian, 211. Z. Zoological Gardens, Superintendent of. 140. THE END. WORKS OF HERBERT SPENCER, PUBLISHED BY E>. APPLETON AND COMPANY. SYSTEM OF PHILOSOPHY. L— FIRST PRINCIPLES. (New and Enlarged Edition.) L— THE UNKNOWABLE. PART II.— LAWS OF THE KNOW ABLE. 659 pages. Price, „ $2.50 U.— THE PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY.— VOL. L PART I. — THE DATA OF BIOLOGY. PART II. — THE INDUCTIONS OF BIOLOGY. PART III. — THE EVOLUTION OF LIFE. 475 pages. Price, ........ $2.60 PRINCIPLES OF BIOLOGY.— VOL. II. PART IV. — MORPHOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT. PART V. — PHYSIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT. PART VI. — LAWS OF MULTIPLICATION. 565 pages. Price, $2.50 III.— THE PRINCIPLES OF PSYCHOLOGY. PART I. — THE DATA OF PSYCHOLOGY. 144 pages. Price, - - $0.76 PART II. — THE INDUCTIONS OF PSYCHOLOGY. 146 pa^es Price - $0*75 PART III.— GENERAL SYNTHESIS. 100 pages. / „ PART IV.— SPECIAL SYNTHESIS. 112 pages. j- Price, - . $1.00 MISCELLANEOUS. L— ILLUSTRATIONS OF UNIVERSAL PROGRESS. THIRTEEN ARTICLES. 451 pages. Price, ..... $2.50 II.— ESSAYS : MORAL, POLITICAL, AND ^ESTHETIC. TEN ESSAYS. 386 pages. Price, $2.50 III.— SOCIAL STATICS: OR THE CONDITIONS ESSENTIAL TO HUMAN HAPPINESS SPECIFIED, AND THE FIRST OF THEM DEVELOPED. 623 pages. Price, $2.50 IV.— EDUCATION : INTELLECTUAL, MORAL, AND PHYSICAL. 288 pages. Price, 1 $1.25 V.— CLASSIFICATION OF THE SCIENCES. 60 pages. Price, ... . ..... $9.25 VI.— SPONTANEOUS GENERATION, Ac. 16 pages. Price, . ... $0.25 THE ORIGIN OF CIVILIZATION; OR, THE PRIMITIVE CONDITION OF MAN. By SIR JOHN LTTBBOCK, Bart, M. P., F. E. S. 3SO Fages. Illustrated. This interesting work is the fruit of many years' research by an accomplished naturalist, and one well trained in mod- ern scientific methods, into the mental, moral, and social con- dition of the lowest savage races. The want of a work of this kind had long been felt, and, as scientific methods are being more and more applied to questions of humanity, there has been increasing need of a careful and authentic work de- scribing the conditions of those tribes of men who are lowest in the scale of development. " This interesting work — for it is intensely so in its aim, scope, and the ability of its author — treats of what the scientists denominate anthropology, or the natural history of the human species ; the complete science of man, body and soul, including sex, temperament, race, civilization, etc." — Provi- dence Press. "A work which is most comprehensive in its aim, and most admirable in its execution. The patience and judgment bestowed on the book are every, where apparent ; the mere list of authorities quoted giving evidence of wide and impartial reading. The work, indeed, is not only a valuable one on ac- count of the opinions it expresses, but it is also most serviceable as a book of reference. It offers an able and exhaustive table of a vast array of facts, which no single student could well obtain for himself, and it has not been made the. vehicle for any special pleading on the part of the author." — London Athenaeum. "The book is no cursory and superficial review; it goes to the very heart of the subject, and embodies the results of all the later investigations. It is replete with curious and quaint information presented in a compact, luminous, and entertaining form." — Albany Evening Journal. " The treatment of the subject is eminently practical, dealing more with fact than theory, or perhaps it will be more just to say, dealing only with theory amply sustained by fact." — Detroit Free Press. " This interesting and valuable volume illustrates, to some extent, the way in which the modern scientific spirit manages to extract a considerable treasure from the chaff and refuse neglected or thrown aside by former in- quirers." — London Saturday Review. D APPLETON & CO,, Publishers. D. Appleton & Company^s Publications. LAY SEBMON8, ADDEESSES, AND EEYIEWS, BY THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY. Cloth, 12mo. 390 pages. Price, $1.75 THIS is the latest and most popular of the works of this in- trepid and accomplished English thinker. The American edition of the work is the latest, and contains, in addition to the English edition, Professor Huxley's recent masterly address on " Spon- taneous Generation," delivered before the British Association for the Advancement of Science, of which he was president. The following is from an able article in the Independent : The " Lay Sermons, Addresses, and Reviews " is a book to be read by every one who would keep up with the advance of truth — as well by those who are hostile as those who are friendly to his conclusions. In it, scientific and philosophical topics are handled with consummate abil- ity. It is remarkable for purity of style and power of expression. No- where, in any modern work, is the advancement of the pursuit of that natural knowledge, which is of vital importance to bodily and mental well-being, so ably handled. Professor Huxley is undoubtedly the representative scientific man of the age. His reverence for the right and devotion to truth have estab- lished his leadership of modern scientific thought. He leads the beliefs and aspirations of the increasingly powerful body of the younger men of science. His ability for research is marvellous. There is possible no more equipoise of judgment than that to which he brings the phenomena of Nature. Besides, he is not a mere scientist. His is a popularized phi- losophy ; social questions have been treated by his pen in a manner most masterly. In his popular addresses, embracing the widest range of top- ics, he treads on ground with which he seems thoroughly familiar. There are those who hold the name of Professor Huxley as synony- mous with irreverence and atheism. Plato's was so held, and Galileo's, and Descartes's, and Newton's, and Faraday's. There can be no greater mistake. No man has greater reverence for the Bible than Huxley. No one more acquaintance with the text of Scripture. He believes there is definite government of the universe ; that pleasures and pains are distrib- uted in accordance with law ; and that the certain proportion of evil woven up in the b'fe even of worms will help the man vrho thinks to bear his own share with courage. In the estimate of Professor Huxley's future influence upon science, his youth and health form a large element. He has just passed his forty, fifth year. If God spare his life, truth can hardly fail to be the gainer from a mind that is stored with knowledge of the laws of tbe Creator's operations, and that has learned to love all beauty and hale *3 rileness of Nature and art. SPENCER 8 SYSTEM OF PHILOSOPHY. THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION. By HERBERT SPENCER. This great system of scientific thought, the most original and important men- tal undertaking of the age, to which Mr. Spencer has devoted his life, is now well advanced, the published volumes being: First Principles, The Principles of Bi- ology, two volumes, and The Principles of Psychology, vol. i., which will bo shortly printed. This philosophical system differs from all its predecessors in being solidly based on the sciences of observation and induction ; in representing the order and course of Nature ; in bringing Nature and man, life, mind, and society, under one great law of action ; and in developing a method of thought which may serve for practical guidance in dealing with the affairs of life. That Mr. Spencer is the man for this great work will be evident from the following statements : " The only complete and systematic statement of the doctrine of Evolution with which I am acquainted is that contained in Mr. Herbert Spencer's * System of Philosophy ; ' a work which should be carefully studied by all who desire to know whither scientific thought is tending."— T. H. HUXLEY. " Of all our thinkers, he is the one who has formed to himself the largest new echeme of a systematic philosophy." — Prof. MASSON. "If any individual influence is visibly encroaching on Mills in this country, it is his."— Ibid. " Mr. Spencer is one of the most vigorous as well as boldest thinkers that English speculation has yet produced/'-rToHN STUART MILL. " One of the acutest metaphysicians of modern times." — Ibid. " One of our deepest thinkers." — Dr. JOSEPH D. HOOKER. It is questionable if any thinker of finer calibre has appeared in our conn- try." — GEORGE HENRY LEWES. "He alone, of all British thinkers, has organized a philosophy."— Rid. "He is as keen an analyst as is known in the history of philosophy ; I do not except either Aristotle or Kant."— GEORGE RIPLEY. "If we were to give our own judgment, we should say that, since Newton, there has not in England been a philosopher of more remarkable speculative and •ystematizing talent than (in spite of some errors and some narrowness) Mr. Her- bert Spencer."— London Saturday Review. " We cannot refrain from offering our tribute of respect to one who, whether for the extent of his positive knowledge, or for the profundity of his speculative insight, has already achieved a name second to none in the whole range of Eng- lish philosophy, and whose works will worthily sustain the credit of Englfsh thought in the present generation."— Westminster Review. D. APPLETOX & CO.'S PUBLICATIONS. ON THE ORIGIN -OF SPECIES BY Means of Natural Selection ; OB. THE PRESERVATION OF FAVORED RACES IN THE STRUGGLE FOR LIFE. , .A.. One Volume. 12mo.' Cloth. $2.00. " His first point is to show that species are in many cases not well defined, and that the whole order of natural history seems to be in a state of mutation, by reason of constant variations. Thus even under domestication, important changes may be introduced by intercrossing, by selection of the best individuals for propagation, by crossing parent* marked by however slight, but favorable peculiarities. "His second point is what he terms the universal and necessary struggle for existence. This follows from the high geometrical ratio of increase common to all beings. If there were no catastrophes, any one of the existing species would be sufficiently numerous in a few thousand years to cover the whole earth, to the exclusion of every- thing else. <• His third point is to prove that this struggle is directed by the law of natural selection. Even the races of domestic animals may be constantly improved and modified by choosing the best individuals for propagation. Nature brings the same discipline to bear upon the whole domain of animal and vegetable life. She seizes at once upon any slight variation that is favorable, and perpetuates it ; in the uni- rersal pressure, any variation that is injurious is immediately extin- guished." Wotks of Herbert Spencer published by D. .dpptcton & C&. A NEW SYSTEM OF PHILOSOPHY. FIRST PRINCIPLES. £ VoL Large 12mo. 515 Pages. Price $2 50. CONTENTS : PART FIRST. — TJie Unknowable. JL. .Religion and Science; II. Ultimate Religious Ideas; 111 Ultimate Scientific Ideas; IV. The Relativity of all Knowledge; V Th« Reconciliation. PART SECOND — Laws of the Knowable. I. Laws in General; II. The Law of Evolution; III. The same con- tinued; IV. The Causes of Evolution; V. Space, Time, Matter, Motion, and Force ; VI. The Indestructibility of Matter ; VII. The Continuity of Motion ; VHL The Persistence of Force ; "IX. The Correlation and Equivalence of Forces; X. The Direction of Motion ; XI. The Rhythm of Motion; XII. The Conditions Essential to Evolution ; XIII. The Instability of the tlomoge- neous ; XIV. The Multiplication of Effects ; XV. Differentiation *»nd Inte- gration ; XVI. Equilibration ; XVII. Summary and Conclusion. In the first part of this work Mr. Spencer defines the province, limits, and relations of religion and science, and determines the legitimate scope of philosophy. In part second he unfolds those fundamental principles which have been arrived at within the sphere of the knowable ; which are true of all orders of phenonema, and thus constitute the foundation of all philosophy. The law of Evolution, Mr. Spencer maintains to be universal, and he has her« worked it out as the basis of his system. These First Principles are the foundation of a system of Philosophy bolder, more elaborate, and comprehensive perhaps, than any other which oat been hitherto designed in England. — British Quarterly Review. A work lofty in aim and remarkable in execution — CorrJdll Mayazinc. In the works of Herbert Spencer we have the rudiments of a positive Theology, and an immense step toward the perfection of the science of Psy- chology. — Christian Examiner. If we mistake not, m spite of the very negative character of his own r^ lalta, be has foreshadowed some strong arguments for tke doctrine of a poai- $re Christian Theology. — New Eng lander. As far as tke frontiers of knowledge, where the Intellect may go, there fi 10 living man whose guidance may more safely be trusted. — Work* of Herbert Spencer published by D. A^/p^on & Co. ESSAYS: MORAL POLITICAL, AND ESTHETIC. In one Volume. .Large 12mo. CONTEXTS : I. The Philosophy of Style. IL Over-Legislation. m. Morals of Trade. IV. Personal Beauty. V. Kepresentative Government VL Prison-Ethics. VII. Railway Morals and Railway Policy. Vm. Gracefulness. IX. State Tamperings with Money and Banks. X. Reform ; the Dangers and the Safeguards. ALSO, SOCIAL STATICS; OR, THE CONDITIONS ESSENTIAL TO HUMAN HAPPINESS SPECIFIED, AND THE FIRST OF THEM DEVELOPED. In one Volume. Large 12mo. All these works are rich In materials for forming Intelligent opinions, even whew we are nimble to agree with those put forth by the author. Much may be learned from them in departments in which our common Educational system is very deficient. The active citizen may derive from them accurate systematized information concerning his highest duties to society, and the principles on which they are based. He may gain Blearer notions of the value and bearing of evidence, and be better able to distinguish between facts and Inferences. lie may find common things suggestive of wiser thought —nay, we will venture to say of truer emotion — than before. By giving us fuller reali- sations of liberty and justice his writings will tend to increase our self-reliance in th« great emergency of civilization to -which we have been summoned. — Atlantic AfontJdv Works of Herbert Spencer published by D. Appteton & Co. ILLUSTRATIONS OF UNIVERSAL PROGRESS, A SERIES OF DISCUSSIONS. 1 Vol Large 12mo. 470 Pages. Price $2.50. CONTENTS : American Notice of Spencer's New System of Philosophy. I. Progress : its Law and Cause. II Manners and Fashion. III. The Genesis of Science. IV. The Physiology of Laughter. V. The Origin and Function of Music. VI. The Nebular Hypothesis. VII. Bain on the Emotions and the Will. VIIL Illogical Geology. IX. The Development Hypothesis. X. The Social Organism. XI. Use and Beauty. XII. The Sources of Architectural Types. XIIL The Dse of Anthropomorphism. These Essays constitute a body of massive and original thought upon a large variety of important topics, and will be read with pleasure by all who appreciate a bold and powerful treatment of fundamental themes. The general thought which pervades this book is beyond doubt the most impor tant that the human mind has yet reached. — N. Y. Independent. Those who have read the work on Education, will remember the ana- lytic tendency of the author's mind — his clear perception and admirable ex- position of urst principles — his wide grasp of facts — his lucid and vigorous gtyle, and the constant and controlling bearing of the discussion on practical results. These traits characterize all Mr. Spencer's writings, and mark, in an eminent degree, the present volume. — N. Y. Tribune. We regard the distinguishing feature of this work to be the peculiarly Interesting character of its matter to the general reader. This is a great literary as well as philosophic triumph. In the evolution of a system of Philosophy which demands serious attention, and a keen exercise of the in- tellect to fathom and appreciate, he has mingled much that is really populai tnd entertaining. — Rochester Democrat. Wock$ of Herbert Spencer published by D. AppUtcn Co. HEAT, CONSIDERED AS A MODE OF MOTION, Being a Course of Twelve Lectures delivered before the Royal Institution of Great Britain. BY JOHN TYNDALL, F. E. 8., or NATITRAI. PHILOSOPHY IN THE EOYAL INSTITUTION— AUTHOB OF ni* "GLACIEBS OF THB ALPS," ETC. With One, Hundred Illustrations. Svo, 480 pages. Price, $2. From the American Journal of Science. — "With all the skill which has made Faraday the master of experimental science in Great Britain, Professor Tyndall enjoys the advantage of a superior general culture, and is thus enabled to set forth hia philosophy with all the graces of eloquence and the finish of superior diction. With a simplicity, and absence of technicalities, which render his explanations lucid to un- scientific minds, and at the same time a thoroughness and originality by which he in- structs the most learned, he unfolds all the modern philosophy of heat. His work takea rank at once as a classic upon the subject New York Times.— Professor Tyndall's course of lectures on heat is one of the most beautiful illustrations of a mode of handling scientific subjects, which is com- paratively new, and which promises the best results, both to science and to literature generally ; we mean tile treatment of subjects in a style at once profound and popu- lar. The title of Professor Tyndall's work indicates the theory of heat held by him, and indeed the only one now held by scientific men — it is a mode of motion. Boston Journal. — He exhibits the curious and beautiful workings of nature in A most delightful manner. Before the reader particles of water lock themselves or fly asunder with a movement regelated like a dance. They form themselves into liquid flowers with fine serrated petals, or into rosettes of frozen gauze ; they bound upward In boiling fountains, or creep slowly onward in stupendous glaciers. Flames burst into music and sing, or cease to sing, as the experimenter pleases, and metals paint the Q- »elves upon a screen in dazzling hues as the painter touches his canvas. New York Tribune. — The most original and important contribution that ha* yet been made to the theory and literature of thermotics. Scientific American. — The work is written in a charming style, and is the most valuable contribution to scientific literature that b ia been published in many years. It is the most popular exposition of the dynamical theory of heat that has yet appeared. The old material theory of heat may be said to be defunct. Louisville Democrat. — This is one of the most delightful scientific works we btye ever met The lectures are so full of life and spirit that we can almost imagin« the lecturer before us, and see his brilliant experiments in every stage of their progress. The theory is so carefully and thoroughly explained that no one can fail to understand St. Such books as these create a love for science. Independent.— Professor Tyndall's expositions and experiments are remarkably thoughtful, ingenious, clear, and convincing ; portions of the book have almost th« Interest of a romance, so startling are the descriptions and elucidations Q I-