THE SHARK'S TEETH 



There seems in this case to be a certain degree of 

 disproportion between structure and function; the 

 former providing an outfit beyond the needs of the 

 latter. The creature could if necessary (and often 

 does) do without such an armament. We begin to 

 feel that, if there is no disharmony, there is at least 

 a certain inequality, a mutual independence, which 

 does not cause them to be entirely bound up with one 

 another. If we pursue the study further, and extend 

 it to all the known families of living and fossil sharks, 

 we are still more driven to this conclusion. We see 

 that the function makes use of the organ but does 

 not, by any means, create it. The argument which 



Fig. 20. — The Basking Shark, which may be as long as 35 to 40 feet. 



we have constructed concerning the teeth is only a 

 continuation and a completion of that which we built 

 up around the scale. 



The porbeagle of our waters are sharks of con- 

 siderable size, and large specimens are sometimes as 

 much as sixteen or twenty feet long, including the 

 tail. But sharks of an even larger kind are occasionally 

 caught both in the Mediterranean and the Atlantic 

 near our coasts. These are the " basking " sharks, 

 to which French fishermen have given the name 

 " Pelerins " or " hooded " sharks, because of the 

 appearance on the sides of their broad necks, covering 

 the large gill-slits, of several folds of skin, like those of 

 an old-fashioned cloak, superimposed one over the 

 other. These fish sometimes measure thirty or forty 

 114 



