196 MISCELLANEOUS OBJECTIONS TO THE 



distinct individuals, but not through natural selection ; for 

 as these morphological characters do not affect the welfare 

 of the species, any slight deviations in them could not have 

 been governed or accumulated through this latter agency. 

 It is a strange result which we thus arrive at, namely, that 

 characters of slight vital importance to the species are the 

 most important to the systematist ; but, as we shall here- 

 after see when we treat of the genetic principle of classifica- 

 tion, this is by no means so paradoxical as it may at first 

 appear. 



Although we have no good evidence of the existence in 

 organic beings of an innate tendency toward progressive 

 development, yet this necessarily follows, as I have at- 

 tempted to show in the fourth chapter, through the con- 

 tinued action of natural selection. For the best definition 

 which has ever been given of a high standard of organiza- 

 tion, is the degree to which the parts have been specialized 

 or differentiated ; and natural selection tends toward this 

 end, inasmuch as the parts are thus enabled to perform their 

 functions more efficiently. 



A distinguished zoologist, Mr. St. George Mivart, has 

 recently collected all the objections which have ever been 

 advanced by myself and others against the theory of natural 

 selection as propounded by Mr. Wallace and myself, and 

 has illustrated them with admirable art and force. When 

 thus marshalled, they make a formidable array ; and as it 

 forms no part of Mr. Mivart's plan to give the various 

 facts and considerations opposed to his conclusions, no 

 slight effort of reason and memory is left to the reader, 

 who may wish to weigh the evidence on both sides. When 

 discussing special cases, Mr. Mivart passes over the effects 

 of the increased use and disuse of parts, which I have 

 always maintained to be highly important, and have treated 

 in my " Variation under Domestication " at greater length 

 than, as I believe, any other writer. He likewise often 

 assumes that I attribute nothing to variation, independently 

 of natural selection, whereas in the work just referred to 

 I have collected a greater number of well-established cases 

 than can be found in any other work known to me. My 

 judgment may not be trustworthy, but after reading with 

 care Mr. Mivart's book, and comparing each section with 

 what I have said on the same head, I never before felt so 

 strongly convinced of the general truth of the conclusions 

 here arrived at, subject, of course, in so intricate a subject^ 

 to much partial error, * 



