254 NOTICES OF BOOKS. 



"^ 



easily disposed of; the first of these is the assumed presence of Jlg(^ 

 in rocks older than those containing land-plants. Now the presence 

 of ^Iffce in the water is no proof of the absence of land-plants, and 

 the ^Iff^ may, if present, have been more highly organized than any 

 now existing* but we have seen no evidence of Alff^ amongst the so- 

 called Fucoids of the protozoic rocks ; what we have seen to be so called 

 are appearances that pass the inventive powers of palaeontologists to 

 explain naturally, are sometimes inorganic matters^ and at others, casts 

 of Bryozoa whose structure is lost. In no case does a so-called Fucoid 

 present any proof of being an Alga ; in most cases it is so considered 

 only because it is not recognized by the zoologist as belonging to his 

 kingdom. 



The second argument is the assumed inferiority of the Gymnosperms, 

 which we dispute ; and the third is the assumed absence of any Angio- 

 spermous Dicotyledons, or of Monocotyledons below the Chalk, and 

 which was a few years ago assumed of the Chalk also. But not only 

 are there indications of true Palms, and of other Orders, in the Coal, 

 but the capital experiments of Lindley, who tested the powers 

 sisting decay, possessed by various Natural Orders, show that Ferns, 

 ConifercBy Lycopodiacece ^ and Cycadem^ are the most imperishable under 

 water, which, taken with the fact that the formation of coal is due, m 

 part at least, to a local and not to a promiscuous assemblage of plants, 

 representing the vegetation of the period ; and the force of the very 

 weak argument, founded on the absence of certain Orders, is reduced 

 to a shadow. 



The only other theoretical point to which we shall allude, is the ap- 

 pearance of species (whether as creations or transmutations) in one spot 

 or in many spots. Here again we have no evidence to guide us, and 

 can only assume a position, as in the former cases, upon the broadest 

 view of the facts of distribution ; now it is undisputed that the most 

 prominent feature in distribution is that, as a general rule, species are 

 grouped in more or less restricted areas, after a manner that is quite 

 consistent with the hypothesis of their having spread from one spot. 

 The exceptions may be very numerous, and the question remains, how 

 may those cases be most easily accounted for which cannot be explained 



s of re- 



by migration ; if by a double creation of the same species, we wander 

 further into the regions of pure hypothesis ; but if by transmutation, 

 we may assume that the power that species have of forming races, has 

 been developed at two or more spots instead of one. This demands 



