82 [Sept. 



Somewhat allied to this is the opinion of Swainson and others, that permanent 

 varieties constitute species, or in other words, that variations of climate, food 

 and treatment produce specific distinctions. 



Species is defined byBuffon, "a succession of similar individuals which re-pro- 

 duce each other." Cuvier's definition is nearly the same ; but he adds that "the 

 apparent difference of the races of our domestic species are stronger than those of 

 any species of the same genus. The fact of the s/tccession, therefore, and of the 

 constant succession, constitutes alone the validity of the species." 



An objection to these definitions arises from the fact that they apply as readily 

 to mere varieties as to acknowledged species. Certain albino animals re-produce, 

 inter se, to an indefinite extent ; such also is the case with some fanciful varieties 

 of the dog, pigeon, &c., which are capable of multiplying by the law of succes- 

 sion, and yet have no claim to specific distinction, in the restricted acceptation 

 of that term. 



I have brought together these definitions, in the first place to show that 

 naturalists are by no means agreed upon what constitutes a species, and secondly, 

 to offer some views of my own. 



As the result of much observation and reflection, I now submit a definition 

 which I hope will obviate at least some of the objections to which I have alluded. 

 Species a primordial organic form. It will be justly remarked that a difficulty 

 presents itself, at the outset, in determining what forms are primordial ; but inde- 

 pendently of various other sources of evidence, we may be assisted in the 

 inquiry by those monumental records, both of Egypt and Assyria, of which we 

 are now happily possessed of the proximate dates. My view may be briefly 

 explained by saying, that if certain existing organic types can be traced back 

 into the "night of time," as dissimilar as we see them now, is it not more 

 reasonable to regard them as aboriginal, than to suppose them the mere accidental 

 derivations of an isolated patriarchal stem of which we know nothing ? Hence, 

 for example, I believe the dog family not to have originated from one primitive 

 form, but from many. Again, what I call a species may be regarded by some 

 naturalists as a primitive variety ; but, as the difference is only in name, and in 

 no way influences the zoological question, it is unnecessary to notice it further. 



These views appear to correspond with those of Mr. Linnaeus Martin, who 

 expresses himself in the following terms : 



" We are among those who believe that, as there are degrees in the relationship 

 of species to species, some may, although distinct, approximate so nearly as not 

 only to produce tnier se, mules incapable of interbreeding, but a progeny of fertile 

 hybrids, capable of admixiiire, even to the inost 7mlimited extent 1 



Species may therefore be classed according to their disparity or affinity, in 

 the following provisional manner : 



Remote species of the same genus, are those among which hybrids are never 

 produced. 



Allied species produce, inter se, an infertile offspring. 



Proximate sjjccies produce with each other a fertile offspring. 



