treatise having any pretensions to scientific standing; and truly may we say, that if such reasoning as this belongs to even the lowest and most rudimentary form of science, then Cuvier, Agassiz, Müller, Owen, Jones, Sedgwick, Phillips, and others, never understood its import, nor comprehended the true method of investigating nature. None of these prodigies of interpretation, however, seem to startle Mr Darwin. Having made up his mind to place the sceptre of creation in the hands of his Metaphor, he seems to rejoice in extravagant expressions which may in any way glorify the chief puppet of his theory. Hence he tells us

She can act on every internal organ, on every shade of constitutional difference, on the whole machinery of life' (87). And with such a declaration, what may we not expect to be hazarded for its illustration ?

In one of the author's most eccentric passages, we have the following curious information accompanied by reasoning equally curious. The tail of the giraffe looks like an artificially constructed fly-flapper; and it seems at first incredible that this should have been adapted for its present purpose by successive slight modifications, each better and better, for so trifling an object as driving away flies; yet we should pause before being too positive even in this case, for we know that the distribution and existence of cattle and other animals in South America absolutely depend on their power of resisting the attacks of insects; so that individuals, which could by any means defend themselves from these small enemies, would be able to range in new pastures, and thus gain a great advantage. A welldeveloped tail having been formed in an aquatic animal, it might subsequently come to be worked in for all sorts of

purposes-as a fly-flapper, an organ of prehension, or as aid in turning, as with the dog' (215).

There are several points to notice in this statement: first, a well-developed tail had been formed' in an aquatic animal. How formed? By Natural Selection, of course, for the theory allows of no other formative power; but as this is always an exceedingly slow operation, requiring many ages, there must have been some thousands of ages when aquatic animals had no tails at all! They were forming in the waters by Natural Selection, but how, during the tailless period of their history, they directed their course in the water is not explained; fishes without tails would certainly be curiosities. However, such was their condition before their tails were formed.' After this, the fishes having in the process of long ages acquired a tail, that important appendage to their existence 'came to be worked in!' How worked in, and who was the artificer of the work? The Metaphor, of course,—the ever watchful and ingenious Natural Selection. She worked in' the fishes' tails into the posterior extremities of the vertebral column. of sundry land-animals. The meaning of which is, certain fishes came to be' converted into land-animals, and then their tails were adapted to their new forms which they had acquired. Some for flappers (horses, cows, &c.), some as prehensile tails (monkeys), some as rudders in turning.

Thus, then, the tail of a horse may have been antecedently the caudal instrument of a shark, a cow may have derived her tail from the skate, and the giraffe owe his fly-flapper to a remote progenitor, the sturgeon.

Mr Darwin, solicitous to sustain the dignity of Natural Selection, feels it but due to her character to apologize for

the formation of a tail, through her instrumentality, for 'so trifling an object as driving away flies.' We are then gravely informed, as if we had never heard it before, that cattle in hot countries cannot dispense with a tail—' the distribution and existence of cattle and other animals in South America depend upon their power of resisting insects.' The learned author need not have referred us to South America to prove his position; what we see in England is convincing enough on that head. Cattle deprived of their tails in a hot summer in this country would go wild, and would probably perish in the excess of irritation. We are fully convinced that this is not a trifling matter. Natural Selection has not at all demeaned herself in condescending to work in' fishes' tails into the organization of cattle and other animals. Thus, then, Mr Darwin comes to the conclusion that it really has been for the benefit of animals that they should have tails for fly-flappers; only he must have the tail formed in his own peculiar way to suit his theory. The poor animals did not make their appearance in life with this necessary provision, but in a million of years or so they very slowly acquired a tail. To use his own words, it was adapted for its present purpose, by successive slight modifications, each better and better ’— the tail always growing a little longer because it was more advantageous for the beast to have it lengthened-whilst the beasts that had no tail growing, died off by myriads in the struggle for life. Now this, be it observed, is seriously meant, though not so expressed, for in this very part of his disquisition, Mr Darwin is careful to remind us that it certainly is not true that new organs appear suddenly in any class' (214). A memento to prevent us admitting a statement which might seem to imply a work of creation. We

must therefore be very careful to remember that the tail of the horse, or the cow, or the giraffe, grew very slowly; and this of course means geological slowness. But a cow or horse with a tail only the hundred-thousandth part of its present length would not reap much benefit from the addition: it would only be appreciable by a powerful microscope, and would be of no advantage to its proprietor as far as we can see. Let us suppose that at the end of some thousand years a cow's tail had grown an inch long, it would certainly avail nothing for the flagellation of insects, nor can we see any reason why this slowly-improving cow or horse should by this slight variation' gain the victory in the competition for existence; nevertheless, cows' tails grew by Natural Selection, till at last they came to be those instruments which we now see them to be, mutatis mutandis. This sort of history is applicable to every animal-to the trunk of the elephant, the horns of the deer, the hoof of the horse, &c.

This, however, incidentally lets us into a secret, that in all these dreams of transformation a prospective advantage is always implied, as is obvious in this history of tails. No organ can be made suddenly, that is a fundamental rule in the theory; nevertheless, every remarkable organ has been slowly advancing in its formation, till it becomes. the instrument requisite for some particular purpose, and then it advances no more. This implies, and means, that there is a design somewhere. Mr Darwin may shrink from this as he likes, but his slow growth of organs tending to an object, and that growth ceasing when the object is obtained, means only slow design. Mr Darwin may flatter himself that his millions of ages may conceal this, but it only makes apparent, that when any one tries to explain

the productions of nature without a design he has an impossible task on his hands, and that it is impracticable to frame such a theory without occasionally admitting the principle which it is especially intended to exclude.

But this history of animals has greater marvels still, for not only had many of these terrestrial creatures an aquatic origin' (215), but some land-animals have changed their original nature, and become aquatic. If we should be startled by hearing that a giraffe was once a fish, full as great must be our surprise to hear that a whale was once a bear. In North America,' we are informed, 'the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water, I see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered by Natural Selection more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.'* This appeared in the first edition of the Origin of Species, but has been suppressed in the subsequent editions, for no sufficient reason, as far as we can discern. It is in perfect harmony with all the rest of this wonderful creed, and is not one whit more ridiculous than many other statements reprinted in the last edition. The reader would be puzzled in endeavouring to strike the balance of absurdity between the origin of tails and the parentage

*In the third and subsequent editions the passage is thus given :In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, almost like a whale, insects in the water' (202).

The transformation is thus omitted. Nevertheless, the statement is left now as suggestive of the transformation, for it follows immediately a passage in which the author suggests the probable change of many birds. Indeed, if it does not convey this hint, the whole passage seems to want a purpose.