as indicating Affinities of Species, 401 



First, then, let us consider affinity, which, according to 

 the views I hold, is inseparably connected with the doctrine 

 of types. 



All organised matter is, of course, intrinsically allied in 

 its nature, as contradistinguished from that which is not 

 organised ; this, therefore, is the first, or, as some would 

 rather say, the last, the ultimate, the slightest possible, degree 

 of affinity. Next, we have a grand primary distribution of 

 all organic matter into the animal and vegetable kingdoms * ; 

 a division too obvious to be for a moment called in question, 

 and universally allowed ; admitted even, inconsistently enough, 

 by those who hold that every natural assemblage of species, 

 great or small, forms part of some quinary circle. Now, I 

 cannot but observe here, in passing, that, to any unbiassed 

 person, I should think that a due consideration of this first 

 binary distribution must at once carry conviction to the mind, 

 must be at once a most unanswerable argument against all 

 quinary or similar doctrines ; the which, of course, if based 

 upon sound theory, would not only be found to hold good, 

 but would be most obviously indicated by these primary and 

 comprehensive assemblages of every created species. But, 

 to return : here we have the animal type, and the vegetable 

 type, diverse in structure, distinct even in chemical composi- 

 tion, insomuch that the kingdom to which any dubious pro- 

 duction appertains may be decided by chemical analysis, 

 even in a fossil, should but a very few particles of its primitive 

 substance have been preserved. Say not, that the kingdoms 

 blend at their ultimate extremities ; for there are no better 

 grounds for this supposition than those which led many, for a 

 time, to advocate the spontaneous generation of Infusoria ; 

 extreme minuteness alone setting the limit to a definite parti- 

 tion. We must therefore admit, that there is a degree of 

 physiological affinity between the most dissimilar animals, and 

 also between the most dissimilar plants, which no animal or 

 vegetable can possibly have for each other : species from the 

 two kingdoms, however these may undoubtedly approximate at 

 the extreme boundaries, can have no higher degree of ajffinity 

 for each other than what they possess in common, as opposed 

 to all unorganised matter; what further relations they may 

 show are, therefore, totally distinct from affinity. 



Leaving plants, we now enter upon the primary divisions 

 of the animal creation, the separate leading types, the dis- 



* The mineral kingdom is a superfluous epithet, too vague to have any 

 meaning beyond a negative one. Chemically speaking, it, indeed, com- 

 prises both the others. The proper distinction is, of course, between 

 organised and not organised.' 



