2 THE GENESIS OF SPECIES [CiiAr. 



evolve itself, — as, e.g., a spider rather than a beetle, a 

 rose-pLiiit ratlier tliaii a pear) is slirouded in obscurity. 

 A fortiori must this be the case with the origin uf 

 a " species." 



Moreover, tlie analogy between a '' species " and an 

 " iiKb'vidnal " is a very inconijdete one. The word ** in- 

 diviihial" denotes a concrete wliole with a real, separate, 

 and distinct existence. The word "species," on the otlicr 

 liaiid, denotes a peculiar congeries of characters, innate 

 ]">owers and (pialities, and a certain nature realized indeed 

 in indivi(hial.s, but liaving no se])arate existence, except 

 ideally as a thought in some mind. 



Thus the l)irth of a " species " can only be compnred 

 metai)horically, and very imperfectly, Avith that of an 

 " individual." 



Individuals as indivichLah , actually and directly produce 

 and bring forth other individuals ; .but no " congeries of 

 cliaracters," no " common nature " as such, can directly 

 bring forth another " common nature," because, per se, it 

 has no existence (other than ideal) apart from the indi- 

 viduals in which it is manifested. 



The prnblum then is, " by what coml)ination of natural 

 laws does a new ' common nature' appear upon the scene 

 of realized existence ?" i.e. how is an individual cndtody- 

 ing such new characters produced? 



For the approximation we have of late made towards 

 the solution of this problem, we are mainly indebted to 

 the invaluable lal)ours and active brains of Charles Darwin 

 and Alfred Wallace. 



Nevertheless, important as have been the impulse and 

 direction given by tho.se writers to both our observations 

 and speculations, the solution will nut (if the views here 



