May, 1896. SOME NEW BOOKS. 333 



history the most important impulse which it has ever received " 

 (II., p. 233), But perhaps we do not reaHse the enormous benefit 

 that American science derived from the enthusiasm of Agassiz. He 

 who had created the scientific centre of Neufchatel, embraced and 

 invigorated a continent as easily as a city. One of his many improve- 

 ments, the manner of publishing scientific writings, is well brought 

 out by Mr. Marcou. Before his arrival most important works on 

 American zoology had been published in Europe, and the scientific 

 reports occasionally issued by the Government were in bad type on 

 worse paper. Agassiz, with his European draughtsmen and litho- 

 graphers, transferred to Cambridge the example begun in Switzerland, 

 and American scientific publications soon became, as they have re- 

 mained, the envy of the world. Would that an Agassiz might pay a 

 visit to H.M. Stationery Office! 



But, however great the impulse that Agassiz gave to the local 

 investigation of nature, there can be little doubt that, as regards 

 science in general, if we set aside the Glacial theory, the estimate of 

 Mr. Marcou is too high. Those who have studied the works of Agassiz 

 know well enough what a mine they are of accurate facts and brilliant 

 suggestions. But his " Essay on Classification," the book that summed 

 up his philosophy of zoology, a book well worth the careful study of 

 all naturalists, has been simply shelved by the majority in favour of 

 the " Origin of Species." This is a fact that it would be idle to deny, 

 quite apart from any discussion as to the relative value of the two 

 works. The world of zoologists was panting for a revelation, for some 

 guiding principle, and it was not from Agassiz that the revelation 

 came. This, indeed, is fully realised by Marcou, who forcibly con- 

 trasts the " classifiers and pioneer naturalists," including Cuvier, 

 Agassiz, Owen, d'Orbigny, Deshayes, Ed. Forbes, Thomas Davidson, 

 Pictet de la Rive, Herman von Meyer, Barrande, Lartet, and Cotteau, 

 with the "philosophical naturalists," most of whom appear, according 

 to our author, to lack some of their senses, being blind, or deaf, or 

 invalids, or hermits. But even Agassiz said, " facts are stupid things 

 until brought into connection with some general law," and after all it 

 is the philosophers who give the most enduring and the widest impetus; 

 and so Mr. Marcou — who, like Balaam, cannot help speaking the 

 truth — admits of Cuvier and Agassiz that, " both saw facts and 

 observed them sharply, but neither thought to link them by theories 

 calculated to lead to the discovery of other facts. They were ' terre- 

 a-terre ' naturalists, while Lamarck, Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Darwin, 

 Huxley, looked forward to the future, prophesying, and always ready 

 to call to their help suppositions and probabilities." 



Mr. Marcou of course does not mean that Agassiz never theorised. 

 On the contrary, he tells us elsewhere that he speculated too much. 

 But the truth seems to be that his speculations, like so many of his 

 enterprises, were rashly entered upon and thrown aside by their 

 author for want of patience to undertake the continuous drudgery 

 necessary for their development. 



This, then, is how Agassiz appears to us after the perusal of this 

 book. An insatiate collector, a careful and penetrating observer, a 

 lucid describer, a rapid worker, 



" A mortal, built upon the antique plan, 

 Brimful of lusty blood as ever ran, 

 And taking life as simply as a tree." 



His unbounded energy initiated vast schemes, but lacked the perse- 

 verance and organising power to bring them to a successful issue. 



