No. 1.] THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES. 11 



Family. Gemjs. Species. Supporters. 



(T 1 „,^ i«r,<- S Pi'Otluction of adults Milton. 



inaepentlent ^ production of eggs Swedenborg. 



^i„ „.- (Production (Transmutation — Lamarck. 



Creation - ) nf J v Dirwin 



I Derivative f ^^-^ '^ies ^^'^tural selection I^,F™. 



IDemative I p- Vestiges." 



I ( Production \ O^din-'^n' Genesis \ ? J/|««^- 



W of j I Mivart. 



( Species 1. Parthenogenesis . . • Ferris. 



The above will explain itself to those who are already familiar 

 with the subject, but a few words may be added for others. If 

 the species of animals and plants were created independently of 

 all other species, then they must have been made as either perfect 

 and fully formed individuals or as seeds and eggs. The former 

 view is here ascribed to Milton rather than to Moses or Scripture, 

 because most intelligent people now admit that the earlier chap- 

 parallelism between the different stages of life in the individual and 

 those in the entire group of the molluscous order Tetrabranchiata." 

 (Mem. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. Vol. I, part ii, 1867.) Prof. Hyatt re- 

 marks that Dr. Dawson has " given Prof. Cope the undivided credit 

 of discovering the law of acceleration, whereas the memoir referred to 

 above, which has escaped Dr Dawson's notice, "will remove all doubt 

 that the aim of a large part of the observations there recorded, is 

 identical with those of Prof. Cope's more elaborate es^aj\ We have 



no desire for controversy but feel that silence in the 



present instance would place in a false light the object of these in- 

 vestigations, and vitiate the original value of the results of much 

 labour not yet published." (Loc. cit. 234.) 



We may add that Prof. Hyatt's paper was read Feb. 21, 18CG, and 

 Prof. Cope's on the Cyprinoid Fishes, in which his views were first 

 enunciated, in Oct. 19 of the same year, though only published in the 

 Trans. Amer, Philos. Soc, vol. 13, in 1869, after hi« elaborated views 

 on the origin of species had appeared in the Proc. Phil. Acad. Sciences 

 for 1868. No one who knows Prof. Cope can doubt that he, like Dr. 

 Dawson and the author of the review here copied from The Nation, 

 was unacquainted with the views of Prof. Hyatt. In justice to the 

 latter, however, as an independent w^orker in this field, it is well to 

 put these facts on record to avoid any future misconceptions. 



It should perhaps be explained that Dr. Dawson's reasons for pre- 

 ferring the theory of Messrs. Hyatt and Cope did not imply any ad- 

 hesion on his part to the hypothesis of derivation, but was based 

 merely on the circumstance that the possibility of the passage of an 

 animal from one genus to another by acceleration or retardation of 

 development, seems to be proved by at least a few though perhaps 

 (exceptional facts, open to observation ; while the change of one spe- 

 cies into another is totally destitute of any observed examples or 

 positive proof. — Eds. Canadian Naturalist. 



