Miscellaneous. 225 



presented in its true light by Mr. Darwin ; but this process of raising 

 breeds by the selection of favourable subjects is in no way similar to 

 that which regulates specific differences. Nothing is more remote 

 from the truth than the attempted parallelism between the breeds of 

 domesticated animals and the species of wild ones. Did there exist 

 such a parallelism as Darwin maintains, the difference among the 

 domesticated breeds should be akin to the differences among wild 

 species, and afford a clue to determine their relative degree of affinity 

 by a comparison with the pedigrees of well-known domesticated races. 

 Again, if there were any such parallelism, the distinctive character- 

 istics of different breeds should be akin to the differences which exist 

 between fossil species of earlier periods and those of the same genera 

 now living. Now let any one familiar with the fossil species of the 

 genera Bos and Cams compare them with the races of our cattle and 

 of our dogs ; and he will find no correspondence whatever between 

 them, for the simple reason that they do not owe their existence to 

 the same causes. It must therefore be distinctly stated that Mr. 

 Darwin has failed to establish a connexion between the mode of 

 raising domesticated breeds and the cause or causes to which wild 

 animals owe their specific differences. 



It is true Mr. Darwin states that the close affinity existing among 

 animals can only be explained by a community of descent, and he 

 goes so far as to represent these affinities as evidence of such a 

 genealogical relationship ; but I apprehend that the meaning of the 

 words he uses has misled him into the belief that he had found the 

 clue to phsenomena which he does not even seem correctly to under- 

 stand. There is nothing parallel between the relations of animals 

 belonging to the same genus or the same family and the relations 

 between the progeny of common ancestors. In the one case we have 

 the result of a physiological law regulating reproduction, and in the 

 other, affinities which no observation has thus far shown to be in any 

 way connected with reproduction. The most closely allied species of 

 the same genus, or the different species of closely allied genera, or the 

 different genera of one and the same natural family, embrace repre- 

 sentatives which at some period or other of their growth resemble 

 one another more closely than the nearest blood relations ; and yet 

 we know that they are only stages of development of different species 

 distinct from one another at every period of their life. The embryo 

 of our common freshwater turtle (Chrysemys jpicta) and the embryo 

 of our snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) resemble one another 

 far more than the different species of Chrysemys in their adult state ; 

 and yet not a single fact can be adduced to show that any one egg 

 of an animal has ever produced an individual of any species but its 

 own. A young snake resembles a young turtle or a young bird 

 much more than any two species of snakes resemble one another ; 

 and yet they go on reproducing their kinds, and nothing but their 

 kinds. So that no degree of affinity, however close, can, in the pre- 

 sent state of our science, be urged as exhibiting any evidence of com- 

 munity of descent, while. the power that imparted all their peculiari- 

 ties to the primitive eggs of all the species now living side by side 



