670 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY, 



The lode of discovery once struck, those petrified forms in which 

 life was at one time active increased to multitudes and demanded clas- 

 sification. The general fact soon became evident that none but the 

 simplest forms of life lie lowest down — that as we climb higher and 

 higher among the superimposed strata more perfect forms appear. 

 The change, however, from form to form was not continuous, but by 

 steps, some small, some great. " A section," says Mr. Huxley, " a 

 hundred feet thick will exhibit at difierent heights a dozen species of 

 ammonite, none of which passes beyond its particular zone of lime- 

 stone, or clay, into the zone below it, or into that above it." In the 

 presence of such facts it was not possible to avoid the question. Have 

 these forms, showing, though in broken stages and with many irregu- 

 larities, this unmistakable general advance, been subjected to no con- 

 tinuous law of growth or variation ? Had our education been purely 

 scientific, or had it been sufiiciently detached from influences which, 

 however ennobling in another domain, have always proved hindrances 

 and delusions when introduced as factors into the domain of physics, 

 the scientific mind never could have swerved from the search for a law 

 of growth, or allowed itself to accept the anthroj)omorphism which 

 regarded each successive stratum as a kind of mechanic's bench for the 

 manufacture of new species out of all relation to the old. 



Biased, however, by their previous education, the great majority 

 of naturalists invoked a special creative act to account for the appear- 

 ance of each new group of organisms. Doubtless there were numbers 

 who were clear-headed enough to see that this was no explanation at 

 all ; that, in point of fact, it was an attempt, by the introduction of a 

 greater difficulty, to account for a less. But, having nothing to offer 

 in the way of explanation, they for the most part held their peace. 

 Still the thoughts of reflecting men naturally and necessarily sim- 

 mered round the question. De Maillet, a contemporary of Newton, 

 has been brought into notice by Prof. Huxley as one who " had a no- 

 tion of the modifiability of living forms." In my frequent conversa- 

 tions with him, the late Sir Benjamin Brodie, a man of highly-philo- 

 sophic mind, often drew my attention to the fact that, as early as 1794, 

 Charles Darwin's grandfather was the pioneer of Charles Darwin. In 

 1801, and in subsequent years, the celebrated Lamarck, who produced 

 so profound an impression on the public mind through the vigorous 

 exposition of his views by the author of " Vestiges of Creation," en- 

 deavored to show the development of species out of changes of habit 

 and external condition. In 1813, Dr. Wells, the founder of our pres- 

 ent theory of dew, read before the Royal Society a paper in which, 

 to use the words of Mr. Darwin, " he distinctly recognizes the princi- 

 ple of natural selection ; and this is the first recognition that has been 

 indicated." The thoroughness and skill with which Wells pursued his 

 work, and the obvious independence of his character, rendered him 

 long ago a favorite with me ; and it gave me the liveliest pleasure to 



