9 8 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



only final cause, but a designed general order in Nature. When I 

 composed that work I was filled with admiration of the discoveries 

 made by Goethe and Oken, by Owen and Agassiz, as to the beautiful 

 " forms " in Nature. Some may think that the more recent doctrine 

 of development has made that treatise obsolete. I admit that these 

 late discoveries might require me in some places to change my mode 

 of expression ; and the time has scarcely arrived for rewriting that 

 book, and will not arrive till Darwin's doctrine and Owen's doctrine 

 are more thoroughly adjusted. But, meanwhile, the argument is as 

 valid as it ever was, and proves that there is a designed order and 

 beauty in Nature, the design being not less evident because the order 

 and beauty have been brought about by a process of development. 

 This has been shown fully and satisfactorily by St. George Mivart in 

 a recent article in the Contemporary lieview, entitled " Likenesses or 

 Philosophical Anatomy," in which he writes in the same way as I did 

 of homologies, and shows that many of these cannot be explained 

 by development or b}^ a descent from a common parentage. He 

 shows that " there are likenesses between different animals and dif- 

 ferent parts of the same animal which a theory of common descent 

 cannot explain." He specifies instances of lateral, vertical, and serial 

 homology, such as the vertebrae which make up the backbone, all simi- 

 lar, and the likeness between "the thigh, leg, and foot, of the lower 

 limb, evidently more or less repeating the upper arm, arm, and hand, 

 of the upper limb." I am inclined to argue that there is evidence of 

 design in homologies which may have been produced by descent, as 

 when we see the pectoral limb of the horse, the whale, and the bird 

 whether fore-leg, paddle, or wing formed on one type, though turned 

 to very different uses. All that Owen and Agassiz have said about 

 the anticipations and the prophecies in Nature may be acknowledged 

 as true, even by those who hold that they have been produced by 

 development, I do believe that these old horse-like forms were prep- 

 arations for the horse now living. The efficient cause may have 

 been development, but the formal cause (to use Aristotle's phrase) is 

 the perfected animal. We cannot allow this evolution doctrine to 

 shear Nature of its grandeurs, nor, we may add, morality of its bind- 

 ing obligations or the universe of its God. Mr. Mivart concludes: 

 " The teaching of what we believe to be true philosophy is that the 

 types shadowed forth to our intellects by material existences are co- 

 pies of divine originals, and correspond to prototypal ideas in God." 



I close this article with remarking that these views bring Nature 

 and revelation, geology and genesis, into harmony. 



The Book of God begins at the beginning with Genesis, the gen- 

 eration of all things. Science does not seem to tell us of a beginning. 

 The Bible opens, "In the beginning God created the heavens and 

 the earth." It tells us that there were an order and a progression in 

 the generation of our world. First, there is an original creation. 



