94 ANNIYEESAET ADDEESS 



illustrations, not only from all the primordial fossils of the Palseo- 

 Z(jic period,* but also from the fishes of the Old lied Sandstone and 

 the reptiles of the Mesozoic period. 



Dr. Wright's experience is confirmed by the well-known autho- 

 rity of Mr. Etheridge, the Palseontologist of the Geological Survey, 

 and now the President of the Geological Society. The late Pro- 

 fessor Agassiz and Professor Dana (geologists of undoubted emi- 

 nence), and Professor Yirchow (one of the greatest zoologists of 

 the present day), have also rejected the Darwinian hypothesis. f 



One of the latest champions of the new creed is Professor Martins, 

 of Montpellier, who inserted in the ' Revue des deux mondes ' for 

 1877, an interesting article, entitled, " Valeur et concordance dcs 

 preuves sur lesquelles repose la theorie de revolution en histoire 

 naturelle." It is written with that esprit spirituel of which an in- 

 tellectual Frenchman only can boast ; but I am not convinced by 

 this author's reasoning. In legal phraseology, I demur to the very 

 first sentence of his essay, viz. "La science n'a pas de pretention 

 a la verite absolue." Surely truth is, or ought to be, the essence 

 of science. I highly esteem Professor Martins as a kind friend, but 

 not as an exact philosopher. 



Any argument founded on hybridism cannot give a sufficient 

 answer to the present inquiry, because the greater number of in- 

 vertebrate animals, and consequently of all animals, are herma- 

 phrodite sine congressu. 



If the earliest forms of life, which are known to us, exhibit a 

 degree of variation similar to that which occurs in living animals, 

 or indeed exhibit any variation at all, it seems to dispose of Darwin's 

 inference drawn from the difficulty experienced by naturalists in 

 defining the limits of species and other groups. No individual 

 animal or plant has ever been precisely like another individual of 

 the same species. 



The well-established fact of the persistence or continuity of 

 cc'rtain species from the primeval to the present time is opposed to 

 the idea of progressive development and of transmutation. 



Some of my hearers may naturally expect me to otfer some hypo- 

 thesis instead of that which I have ventured to criticise. I am by 

 no means prepared to do this in the absence of the requisite palceon- 

 tological data ; but I will shortly state the articles of my faith. 



* See also Postscript on Projjressive Development, p. 96. 



t Since the delivery of this Address, several other distingnished and experienced 

 palaeontologists have expressed their agreement with the views here set forth. 'I he 

 adaptability to altered conditions of life, and the extent of such adaptability, as well 

 as the improvement or disuse of certain organs, involve a very ditferent principle. 



