230 [September 



sects never vary materially in time, no man can prove ; but that they 

 do sometimes vary most astonishingly in space, and run into what are 

 known as geographical i-aces, there is the fullest and most reliable evi- 

 dence. To give another example, in addition to those already quoted : — 

 Calosomn luxatum Say, G. striatulum Lee. and G. Zimmermanni Lee. 

 were formerly considered by Dr. LeConte and others as perfectly dis- 

 tinct species. But Mr. Ulke tells me that " on showing a large series 

 comprising all the intermediate grades — viz. from Kansas luxatum 

 from Nebraska Idaho and Utah striatuhim, and from Oregon aa<l Cali- 

 fornia Zimmermanni — to Dr. LeConte, he was then convinced of their 

 identity," and they are accordingly in his recent List of N. A. Coleop- 

 tera classified as mere geographical races. 



It is singular that in attempting to prove the immutability of species, 

 from the historic evidence of '' the animals preserved by the ancient 

 Egyptians within their tombs or carved upon the walls of their monu- 

 ments," besides '' the Apis, the Ibis, the Crocodiles and the sacred 

 Beetles," Aga.ssiz quotes the Negro as "the same woolly-haired, thick- 

 lipped, flat-nosed, dark-skinned being in the days of the Ramases that he 

 is now." {MetJi. St. p. 150.) Hence one of two consequences necessa- 

 rily follows, either that, in the opinion of Prof. Agassiz, the negro is a 

 distinct species of the genus Homo, or else, if he is merely a variety, 

 that varieties are, in this one case at all events, as immutable as spe- 

 cies, which destroys the whole force of the argument. It further fol- 

 lows, in the latter case, that there do exist such things as geographical 

 divergences not only in coloration but in structural characters. As 

 to the Sacred Beetles of the Egyptians, I am not aware that any speci- 

 mens have ever been discovered preserved in mummies or sarcophagi, 

 and the rude sculptures of them by ancient Egyptian artists which 

 may be seen in the British Museum are so uncharacteristic, that not 

 only is it utterly impossible to identify the species, but they might just 

 as well pass for Geotrupes or even for JVitidula or Philhydrus as for Gan- 

 thon. Prof. Agassiz must surely know, that it is sometimes impossible 

 to identify insects specifically, even from the very best modern colored 

 drawings, unassisted by descriptions. Is it likely then that they can 

 be identified from sculptures of the rudest and most primitive cha- 

 racter ? 



Instead of recoscnizina; the demonstrable fact, that in a state of nature 



