l8 GREENE 



For any possible expression of views as to the origins of groups of 

 plants and the permanency or mutability of such groups, one would 

 naturally look, not to his many volumes of taxonomic and descriptive 

 writings, but to just such a work as the Philosophia Botanica. Yet 

 there one looks in vain for any expression that is not positively and 

 unmistakably contrary to the idea of evolution. 



In respect to the origin of genera, that which he says — and with 

 Aristotelian brevity and conciseness — is this: "Every genus is na- 

 tural and was in the begininng of things created such."^ And be- 

 cause of this — which might well enough be called the supernatural 

 rather than the natural origin of genera — because of this origin, he 

 argues that: "No one genus is ruthlessly to be divided and treated 

 as if there were two; neither are any two or more to be put together 

 as if constituting only one." 



In the light of such a pronouncement, one could not attribute to 

 Linnaius any notion of the gradual evolution of such groups of species 

 as constitute genera; and if a genus is to have such origin, so, by the 

 necessities of logic, are species also made; and he says: "All species 

 are certain diversities of form which the Infinite Being created so in 

 the beginning; which forms according to immutable laws of generation, 

 produce always their like." From this he proceeds to establish more 

 firmly, if possible, the immutabihty of species by defining generation 

 as being the actual "continuation of the species;" and he concludes 

 by calling attention to how, as by necessity, this origin of all species 

 precludes the possibility of any new species ever arising. And thus, 

 under the heading of species does our author seem to have builded 

 even a more insurmountable wall against the possibility of one's 

 successfully claiming him for the camp of the evolutionists. 



There remains one other category of plant forms, of lower rank than 

 species, recognized by Linnaeus; that of varieties. Unless I err, he 

 claimed that he had been the first of systematists to recognize varieties 

 and to teach the distinctions between variety and species. Will he 

 so define variety as to leave an opening for the possible development 

 of a species out of that which started forth at first as a mere variety? 

 If we use our own reason, and credit Linnncus with not momentarily 

 forgetting to use his, we may not look to see him contradict himself 



* Genus omne est naturale, in primordio tale creatum. Linn. Syst. Nat. 

 and Philos. Bot. 



