OCR Text |
Show EXPLANATIONS. ofdeveloptnent, each of which is a small adYance upo~ the preceUJng, a;:~ the type of a forn1 t}1enceforth to continue perm_anew, .E:!ch. line. stands a pall. ! t n:ay ~~mv sha.dIng~ 111 a ' 'ertlcal direction, as "bt?rween Its I ep~1han a~d 1ts mammal iorms but no tl'IJI?. affinities connecting honzontaiiy with the r'nembers of othe.r 1ines. Our critic is here, therefore, completely at fault. I meet him. again, however~ on special grounds Many of the animals of the ternarv period are of laro·e bull{. We have not only huge exarnp.ies of the pachydc~~l order, in which there are still exi~ting many bulky species, but we have equally vast creatures oe.Jnging to ~he rodent, the. edentate, a.nd ot~er oraers. TLese huge mammals are, Indeed, the stgna1 rorrns of this period, the forms by which the whole ternary system i~ most distinguished. Now, if we take. the h ving pachyderm order, w.e sl~all find that the largest species are of the lowest organiZa.twn. For example, the elennant with its short metatarsus, is a low form compared with the hor.~ e, in ~ hich the heel is raised so much above 1 he CYround. This is a progress of characters which could be shown in many other families. It is a progress which may be generally descri~e~ as passing fro~n tl~e phocal form of th.e hin~ extre.m1ties, t~rough t_h~ plantigrade and ascending to Its ulhmat'!m In th~ d~gib~rade. Now this progress IS coincide~1t w1th !he distnbutwn of the various lines of animals 1n phys1eal geography, for while the first are marine the Recond are generally found in connection with shores, rivers, and low grounds, and the last (always the sl!lallest) with the more.varied surface of the interior. When we find, then, animals of the second kind most conspicuous in this period, we have actual phenomenon remarkably in . accor.dance with the scheme of development. We look In, as 1t were, upon .the world, or at least, its chief zoological provinc~, at the hme when the lines had attained to the terrestnal mammal forms fitted for fluviatile and jungle life, and ere from from these had yet sprung the whole of the smaller but more highly organized denizens of nature's common: Our critic havin(Y now run over the whole senes of fossils, sum~ons C~vier, Agassiz, and Owen to express their vpinions against the theory of devel?pment.. The first "a(Yain and again affirms that the extmct foss1l sp~cles we1~ not produced by any continued natural oi·g~mc law from other species." His French opponents t~·teq, OPINIONS OF CUVIER AND AGASSIZ. 251 eccor~ing to ~he reviewer, to overturn his conclusion by e!'penments 1n cross-breeding and the ransacking of anct~ nt tombs:, And the~ talked conternptuou~~v of za clo_ture du steele de C1wze1·; for which they fall under a refe~enc~ to the fable of: ~h.e ass and the dead lion. Now [ d~sclaim all respons1b1hty ~or the experiments and nnguage of the French theones on this subject B t \'hile I 1:espe?t. Cuvier, I must not concede to~ mu~h wen to h1s op~ni~~· He was, after all, but a man, with .he common l1ab1hty to prejudices. I would with 11 Juc reve{ence <o~· ~he ill u.strious baron, remi~d my :e. ne\~er o an opinion wh1ch the former expressed in t826, that a ?eluge had occurred about six thousand years ~go, W~ICh broke down and n1ade to disappear the countnes which had before been inhabited bv m n d the speci.e s o f anu. na1 s w1. t h which we are bes"t aceq u'a ·a nt - \!U. Ten years after this belief was expressed by cu/n ( fi?d. Dr. Buc.kland quietly withdrawing hi& adhere~C:~ to It In the Bndgewa~er Treatise. At this moment it is not supported by a smgle geologist of the least repute M~y. not, the~, the Baron Cuvier be wrong also in hi~ op1?10n regardmg t?e d~velopment of species? So much, I trust, may be said w1.thout any disparagement to the author ofdt~c Regne 4n1-mal. The fact is, that the erroneous an Imperfect Ideas of gr~at men often become an annoyance, from no fault. on thell' part, but only because th~ weak and n~rrow-mmded are so apt, afterwards, to 5etze u.pon SUCh Ideas, and brandish them in the faces of/ advan?1ng truths. . For M. Agassiz I likewise entertain great I espect; but ~t happens that his liability to error is e9 ually well esta~hshed. The do~ trines which h _ SL~ted. for years 1n maintaining with respect to th: loe~sh~ uhon and movement of glaciers, at·e now all but de-iel te~ for the more accurate and philosophical deductions of Ptofessor James Forbes I may thet·ec01.e r · th . t }}' h' . ' 11 ' eCelVe e In e 1gence w 1c~ theN eufchatel philosopher brin 9 me regard1 ng the fossil fish but be caut1'ous 1'n t· g · f' ll'bl · ' accep 1ng as an 1n _a 1 e diCtum what. he is pleased to say on the comparat1 vely profound doctnne of oro·anic develop t / Profess~~· Owen, "\Y~1ose modest.f ke~.PS pace witY:e~i~ fame, \\Ill hardly pl~tend to an Jnfalbbility which fails 1nr l .t who hsu · ch noted Instan. ces . Besides ' th e d'ffi lt· 1 CU leS v. nc. t. Is great anatomist and others have found in eanct10n1ng the development theory, ch1'efl y res t 1· n m1· s- |