NOTE B. PAGE 27.

In the Third Edition of his "First Principles" (Stereotyped), Mr. Spencer, concluding his observations on this topic, says, "From the remotest past which Science can fathom, up to the novelties of yesterday, an essential trait of Evolution has been the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous." And his last word on the subject is this :—

"As we now understand it, Evolution is definable as a change from an incoherent homogeneity to a coherent heterogeneity, accompanying the dissipation of motion and integration of matter."-Pp. 359, 360.

NOTE C. PAGES 175 and 214.

Lawrence, who quotes in confirmation the words of Cuvier, thus concludes his disquisition on the subject :— "We may conclude, then, from a general review of the preceding facts, that nature has provided, by the INSURMOUNTABLE BARRIER of instinctive aversion, of sterility in the hybrid offspring, and in the allotment of species to different parts of the earth, against any corruption or change of species in wild animals. We must therefore admit, for all the species which we know at present, as sufficiently distinct and constant, a distinct origin and common date."-Lectures on Physiology. First Edition. P. 261.

Cuvier had previously said,-"La nature a soin d'empêcher l'alteration des espèces, qui pourroit résulter de leur mélange, par l'aversion mutuelle qu'elle leur a donnée : il faut toutes les ruses, toute la contrainte de l'homme pour faire contracter ces unions, même aux espèces qui se ressemblent le plus aussi ne voyons nous pas dans nos bois d'individus intermediaires entre le lièvre

et le lapin, entre le cerf et le daim, entre la marte et la fouine?"—Discours Preliminaire. P. 76. (See also P. 71).

And subsequently, M. Flourens,-" Il y a deux caractères qui font juger de l'espèce: la forme, comme dit M. Darwin, ou la ressemblance, et le fécondité. Mais il y a longtemps que j'ai fait voir que la ressemblance, la forme, n'est qu'un caractère accessoire : le seul caractère essentiel est la FÉCONDITE. L'espèce est d'une fécondité continue, et toutes les variétés sont entre elles d'une fécondité continue, ce qui prouve qu'elles ne sont pas sorties de l'espèce, qu'elles restent espèce qu'elle ne sont que l'espèce, qui s'est diversement nuancée. Au contraire, les espèces sont distinctes entre elles, par la raison décisive, qu'il n'y a entre elles qu'une fécondité bornée. J'ai déjà dit cela, mais je ne saurais trop le redire.”—“ Examen du Livre de M. Darwin, Sur l'Origine," etc. Pp. 34-36.

NOTE D. PAGE 221.

"There was an APE in the days that were earlier ; Centuries passed, and his hair became curlier; Centuries more gave a thumb to his wrist

Then he was MAN, and a Positivist."

("The British Birds," ut sup., p. 48.)

NOTE E. PAGE 221.

"II. Now these are the generations of the higher vertebrata. In the cosmic period the Unknowable evoluted the bipedal mammalia.

12. And every man of the earth while he was yet a monkey, and the horse while he was a hipparion, and the hipparion before he was an oredon.

13. Out of the ascidian came the amphibian and begat

the pentadactyle; and the pentadactyle by inheritance and selection produced the hylobate, from which are the simiadæ in all their tribes.

14. And out of the simiade the lemur prevailed above his fellows, and produced the platyrhine monkey.

15. And the platyrhine begat the catarrhine, and the catarrhine monkey begat the anthropoid ape, and the ape begat the longimanous orang, and the orang begat the chimpanzee, and the chimpanzee evoluted the what-is-it.

16. And the what-is-it went into the land of Nod and took him a wife of the longimanous gibbons.

17. And in process of the cosmic period were born unto them and their children the anthropomorphic primordial types.

18. The homunculus, the prognathus, the troglodyte, the autochthon, the terragen :-these are the generations of primeval man.”—The New Cosmogony.

NOTE F. PAGE 223.

"Will you have why and wherefore, and the fact Made plain as pikestaff?' modern Science asks. 'That mass man sprung from was a jelly-lump Once on a time; he kept an after course Through fish and insect, reptile, bird and beast, Till he attained to be an ape at last

Or last but one.'"

"Prince Hohenstiel-Schwangau : Saviour of Society." By Robert Browning. Smith, Elder & Co., 1871. P. 68.

NOTE G. PAGE 282.

"Except by neglecting to distinguish between sight and hearing, the effects, and light and sound, their respective

causes, it would surely have been impossible for Professor Huxley to come to the strange conclusion that if all living beings were blind and deaf, 'darkness and silence would everywhere reign.' Had he not himself previously explained that light and sound are peculiar motions communicated to the vibrating particles of an universally diffused ether, which motions, on reaching the eye or ear, produce impressions which, after various modifications, result eventually in seeing or hearing? How these motions are communicated to the ether matters not. Only it is indispensable to note that they are not communicated by the percipient owner of the eye or ear, so that the fact of there being no percipient present cannot possibly furnish any reason why the motions should not go on all the same.

"But as long as they did go on there would necessarily be light and sound; for the motions are themselves light and sound. If, on returning to his study in which, an hour before, he had left a candle burning and a clock ticking, Professor Huxley should perceive from the appearance of candle and clock that they had gone on burning and ticking during his absence, would he doubt that they had likewise gone on producing the motions constituting and termed light and sound, notwithstanding that no eyes or ears had been present to see or hear? But if he did not doubt this, how could he any more doubt that, although all sentient creatures suddenly became eyeless and earless, the sun might go on shining, and the wind roaring, and the sea bellowing as before?" -Thornton's "Huxleyism.”

It is important to observe that not a few of those who strenuously maintain a doctrine of Evolution, (though not Mr. Darwin's doctrine,) not a few even of Mr. Darwin's

X

most ardent admirers, maintain at the same time and not less strenuously, that the facts in relation to that theory are altogether inexplicable, apart from the recognition of an Intelligent Designer, a presiding Mind, a Universal Power, creative, formative, sustaining.

Thus, for instance, Mr. Thornton, while eulogizing what he calls "the soundness of all the main and really essential principles of Darwinism," exposes with just severity the incompetence and inadequacy of the theories adopted— and necessarily adopted-by those teleologists who reject teleology.

When Mr. Darwin attempts to account for Instinct by hypothecating the accumulation of slight variations from a primordial type—“ variations produced by the same unknown causes as those which produce slight deviations of bodily structure”—Mr. Thornton replies: "But here I am once more compelled to join issue with him. Of the causes which he styles unknown, I maintain that we know at least thus much-either they are themselves intelligent forces, or they are forces acting under intelligent direction; and in support of this proposition I need not perhaps do more than show from Mr. Darwin's example what infinitely harder things must be accepted by those who decline to accept this."

66

Having done this most elaborately, and conceded the long list of "admissions" for which not a little liberality is required," he thus concludes :

"Let us, however, liberally waive this and all similar objections, and assume a community of hive bees to have been, in the utterly unaccountable manner indicated by the term spontaneous variation, developed from a meliponish stock. Unfortunately, all our liberality will be found to have been thrown away without perceptibly simplifying the problem to be solved. For whatever be among meliponæ the distribution of the generative capacities, among hive bees, at any rate, all workers are sterile neuters, which never have any offspring to whom to bequeath their cell-making skill, while the queen-bee and drones, which alone can become parents, have no such skill to be