FUNDAMENTAL RELATIONS OF ANIMALS 51 



With three toes to the fore feet and two toes to the hind feet: Not known. 



With two toes to the fore feet and f Heteromeles, 1 sp., Algiers. 

 three toes to the hind feet: 1 Lerista, 1 sp., New Holland. 



W'ith two toes to the fore feet and two toes to the hind feet: Cheloineles, 1 sp., New 

 Holland. 



With two toes to the fore feet and one toe to the hind feet: Brachymeles, 1 sp., Philip- 

 pine Islands. 



With one toe to the fore feet and two toes to the hind feet: Brachystopus, 1 sp.. South 

 Africa. 



With one toe to the fore feet and one toe to the hind feet: Evesia, 1 sp., Origin un- 

 known. 



GENERA WITH ONLY TWO LEGS 



No representatives are known with fore legs only; but this structural combination 

 occurs in the allied family of the Chalcidioids. The representatives with hind legs 

 only, present the following combinations: — 



With two toes: Scelotes, 1 sp.. Cape Good Hope. 



With one toe: Propeditus, 1 sp.. Cape Good Hope and New Holland. 

 Ophiodes, 1 sp.. South America. 

 Hysteropus, 1 sp.. New Holland. 

 Lialis, 1 sp., New Holland. 

 Dibamus, 1 sp.. New Guinea. 



GENERA WITHOUT ANY LEGS 



Anguis, 1 sp., Europe, Western Asia, Northern Africa. 

 Ophiomorus, 1 sp., Morea, Southern Russia, and Algiers. 

 Acontias, 1 sp., Southern Africa, Cape Good Hope. 

 Typhlina, 1 sp.. Southern Africa, Cape Good Hope. 



Who can look at this diagram, and not recognize in its arrange- 

 ment the combinations of thought? This is so obvious, that while 

 considering it one might almost overlook the fact that while it was 

 drawn up to classify animals preserved in the Museum of the Jardin 

 des Plantes in Paris, it is in reality inscribed in Nature by these ani- 

 mals themselves and is only read off when they are brought together 

 and compared side by side. But it contains an important element for 

 our discussion: the series is not built up of equivalent representa- 

 tives in its different terms, some combinations being richly endowed, 

 others numbering a few, or even a single genus, and still others being 

 altoo;ether disregarded; such freedom indicates selection, and not the 

 working of the law of necessity.^^ 



And if, from a contemplation of this remarkable series we turn 

 our attention to the indications relating to the geographical distri- 



*® [The foregoing is a clear example of the way in which Agassiz interpreted primary 

 evidence for evolution as proof for special creationism. This very example of leg and 

 toe reduction in lizards is still employed in textbooks in zoology to demonstrate the 

 workings of evolution. See Ernst Mayr, "Agassiz, Darwin, and Evolution," Harvard 

 Library Bulletin, XIII (1959), 184.] 



