1899] ORIGIN OF AUSTRALIAN FLORA 207 
Australian species, or of descendants from such, would to-day form 
part of the Indian flora? But if this be admitted, and it is only a 
logical deduction from the facts, the theory of the predominance of 
northern forms collapses, and the restricted area occupied by Aus- 
tralian species must no longer be viewed as depending upon some 
inherent inferiority to northern forms, but simply upon fortuitous 
geographical conditions." 
But we are told that the Australian flora stands less high in the 
scale and is less specialised than are the floras of northern climates, 
and if this be true, the point I am trying to argue must at once be 
given up. But is it true? In what respect, it may be asked, is the 
flora of Australia less highly specialised? Are not. most of the great 
natural orders strong constituents of it? Trees, some of them of 
gigantic size, shrubs, undershrubs and herbs, parasites and saprophytes, 
climbing and carnivorous species, flowers adapted to profit by the 
visits of insects, and sometimes provided with a complex mechanism to 
ensure such profit, all these are met with in Australia. In addition, 
we have wonderful adaptations to a dry climate, and in this respect, 
taking into account the variety of ways in which the destructive effects 
of a scorching sun and parched soil are guarded against, the Australian 
flora is without a parallel the world over. And if these be not 
evidences of high specialisation, it is difficult to know where one must 
look for such. In one respect, and in one only, is any inferiority 
shown, namely, in the comparatively small number of seeds produced. 
But this does not apply to the herbs, and as for the woody species, it 
is absolutely essential that the ripening seeds be safeguarded against 
drought, and the laying on of thick tissues to this end may well be 
effected at some cost as regards fecundity. 
But Mr. Wallace himself gives us an instance where land adjoining 
the, according to him, previously isolated home of the Australian flora 
has been stocked to a considerable extent with Australian forms. As 
I shall have something to say hereafter about this supposition, I will 
now merely assume its truth for argument’s sake. Mr. Wallace,” then, 
supposes the greater part of Northern Australia, previously submerged 
beneath the ocean, to have become dry land in the middle or latter part 
of the tertiary period, and the area so exposed to have been colonised 
partly by Indo-Malayan forms from the north, partly by Australian 
forms from the south. Now, assuming with Mr. Wallace that the 
species with Indo-Malayan facies in Northern Australia were emigrants 
from the north, their considerable numbers prove that there could have 
been but slight, if any, embargo upon mieration from the north when 
' Since this passage was written, Mr. C. B. Clarke has informed me, upon his personal 
knowledge of the Neilgherries, that the success of Australian species there has been much 
exaggerated. In spite of this, I prefer to leave the paragraph as it stands, for it shows, at 
any rate, to what lengths an upholder of the ‘‘northern predominance” theory may be 
inclined to go when in search of an argument to meet alleged facts hostile to the theory. 
2 “Island Life,” p. 493. 
