478 Dr. Falconer on Cuvier's Laws of Correlation, 



iloltfli^'"' "His master-mind misconceived its own processes/' 

 " Whatever Cuvier himself may say, or others repeat, it seems 

 quite clear that the principle of his restorations was not that of 

 the physiological correlation or coadaptation of organs/' 



Such strong assertion should be well supported ; for, besides 

 the attack upon Cuvier and his followers, the very foundations 

 of palaeontology, as they have hitherto been understood, are as- 

 sailed. Let us now see whether soundly or otherwise. Mr. Hux- 

 ley, after showing up the pretensions and shortcomings of the 

 alleged philosophical principle, supplies the blank with a substi- 

 tute of his own, namely, " A law of the invariable coincidence of 

 certain organic peculiarities established by induction ;" or, in 

 other words (when the definition and illustrative cases are ana- 

 lysed), empirical observation. In order to put the case fairly, 

 and guard against the risk of misapprehension, a long extract 

 must be made : — 



•x- -x- ^ ^^ Is this utilitarian adaptation to a benevolent pur- 

 pose, the chief, or even the leading feature of that great shadow, 

 or, we should more rightly say, of that vast archetype of the 

 human mind, which everywhere looms upon us through nature? 

 The reply of natural history is clearly in the negative. She 

 tells us that utilitarian adaptation to purpose is not the greatest 

 principle worked out in nature, and that its value, even as an 

 instrument of research, has been enormously overrated. 



" How is it then, that not only in popular works, but in the 

 writings of men of deservedly high authority, we find the oppo- 

 site dogma — that the principle of adaptation of means to ends is 

 the great instrument of research in natural history — enunciated 

 as an axiom ? If we trace out the doctrine to its fountain-head, 

 we shall find that it was primarily put forth by Cuvier, the prince 

 of modern naturalists. Is it to be supposed then that Cuvier 

 did not himself understand the methods by which he arrived at 

 his great results ? that his master-mind misconceived its own 

 processes ? This conclusion appears to be not a little presump- 

 tuous ; but if the following arguments be justly reasoned out, it 

 is correct : — 



" In the famous ' Disco urs sur les Revolutions de la Surface 

 du Globe,' after speaking of the difficulties in the way of the 

 restoration of vertebrate fossils, Cuvier goes on to say : — 



" ^ Happily, comparative anatomy possesses a principle whose 

 just development is sufficient to dissipate all difficulties ; it is 

 that of the correlation of forms in organized beings, by means 

 of which every kind of organized being might, strictly speaking, 

 be recognized, by a fragment of any of its parts. 



" ' Every organized being constitutes a whole, a single and 

 complete system, whose parts mutually correspond and concur. 



