232 ■'.VRONG NAMES 



side of tlie teeth, which are not opposite, but so set as to shut into otie 

 another like two saws when the jaws are closet!. In tlie herbivora 

 there are no canine teeth, and the molars are broad and ilat, and directly 

 opposed, or are to grind the food between them. The enamel is inter- 

 mixed with ihe osseous substance in vertical layers, constituting tlie 

 raised white lines seen on the grinding surfaces. The teeth of man re- 

 semble those of the carnivora in having the enamel all on the outside. 

 He has canine teeth, but they are shorter and less acute, and are soon 

 worn down to a level with the rest of the series. His molars resemble 

 those of the herbivora, but have rounded tubercles covered with enamel 

 on their surface. He is like them also in the freedom of motion of the 

 lower jaw, which approaches nearly to what we see in the ruminants. 



But it is in the size and shape of the head, and the peculiarities of func- 

 tion dependant upon it that man differs most conspicuously from all other 

 animals. All the differences noticed are unimportant compared with this, 

 and I notice them only to accumulate tlie evidence which shows so wide 

 a diversity of structure, as to render a natural developemenl of man from 

 the inferior types, to say the least, highly improbable. But lest I grow 

 tedious and consume the space so kindly allowed me, to the exclusion 

 of more interesting matter, I must cease for the present. 



WR0NC4 NAMES FOR RIGHT OBJECTS. 



It is amusing to hear the names given by many people to objects of 

 natural history, and we cannot expect that they will ever be changed 

 imtil scientific knowledge is universally diffused. 1 for one do not ex- 

 pect to live to see that blessed period. The most unfounded mistakes 

 prevail even among people who are otherwise well educated, and per- 

 haps in no class of objects do these vulgar names obtain more generally 

 than in x>ctrifaclions. Even sensible persons will call these objects by 

 names which are not in the least degree descriptive of them and wliich 

 in no case belong to them. It is true, in a few instances they bear some 

 remote resemblance to the thing specified by the name, but it is impos- 

 sible they should be the thing itself. Let me give a few examples : 



You often hear men say that they have found a petrified honcy-conib, 

 and some would denounce you as insane vvere you to deny it. The 

 thing has a distant likeness to a wasp's nest, but that object was elab- 

 orated, I suspect, long before there was any thing like a wasp or a bee 

 in existence. It is nothing more than a fossil species of corals which 

 scientific men call syringipora caespitosa. The fact of its being found 

 in abundance hundreds of miles from the sea, only proves that tliis con- 



