Bibliographical Notice. 20? 



rocks of Canada ; but of the form and structure of these plants we 

 know nothing" (p. 168). 



Many interesting suggestions bearing on controverted points might 

 be adduced from the pages of this treatise, did space permit. Thus, 

 in discussing the exact meaning of the Hebrew word " min" Dr. 

 Dawson remarks, " A very important truth is contained in the ex- 

 pression * after its kind,' i. e. after its species ; for the Hebrew ' min? 

 used here, has strictly this sense, and, like the Greek idea and the 

 Latin species, conveys the notion of form as well as that of kind. It 

 is used to denote species of animals in Leviticus i. and xiv., and in 

 Deuteronomy xiv. and xv. We are taught by this statement that 

 plants were created each by itself, and that creation was not a sort 

 of slump-work to be perfected by the operation of a law of develop- 

 ment, as fancied by some modern speculators. In this assertion of 

 the distinctness of species, and the production of each by a distinct 

 creative act, revelation tallies perfectly with the conclusions of natural 

 science, which lead us to believe that each species is permanently 

 reproductive, variable within narrow limits, incapable of permanent 

 intermixture with other species, and a direct product of creative 

 power" (p. 163). And, again, whilst drawing a distinction between 

 the expression to "create" and simply to "form" or "make," he 

 adds : "We may again note that the introduction of animal life is 

 marked by the use of the word ' create,' for the first time since the 

 general creation of the heavens and the earth. We may also note 

 that the animal, as well as the plant, was created ' after its kind,' or 

 'species by species.' The animals are grouped under three great 

 classes, — the Remes, the Tanninim, and the Birds ; but, lest any 

 misconception should arise as to the relations of species to these 

 groups, we are expressly informed that the species is here the true 

 unit of the creative work. It is worth while, therefore, to note that 

 this most ancient authority on this much controverted topic connects 

 species on the one hand with the creative fiat, and on the other with 

 the power of continuous reproduction" (p. 192). 



In like manner, in his 16th chapter (on the " Unity and Antiquity 

 of Man"), Dr. Dawson once more reverts to the same subject : " The 

 species is not merely an ideal unit ; it is a unit in the work of crea- 

 tion. No one better indicates than Agassiz does the doctrine of the 

 creation of animals; but to what is it that creation refers? Not 

 to genera and higher groups : they express only the relations of 

 things created ; — not to individuals as now existing: they are the 

 results of the laws of invariability and increase of the species ; — 

 but to certain original individuals, protoplasts, formed after their 

 kinds or species, and representing the powers and limits of variation 

 inherent in the species, — the 'potentialities of their existence/ as 

 Dana well expresses it. The species, therefore, with all its powers 

 and capacities for reproduction, is that which the Creator has made, 



— His unit in the work, as well as ours in the study The limits 



of variability differ for every species, and must be ascertained by 

 patient investigation of large numbers of specimens, before we can 

 confidently assert the boundaries in some widely distributed and 



