110 
And finally he contradicts Darwin, who held the view 
‘ Natura non factt saltum’ (Nature does not leap), and 
says he is “considering sudden, fer sa/tum, transformations” 
on page 29; and on page 31. Speaking of these Proto- 
theria (which he has too much taken for granted) he 
builds up this fact: “ Proofs not wanting now that some 
of the lower Kutheria, or high beasts, rose rapidly from 
Prototheria without utilising the Metatherian, or inter- 
mediate condition, they did not watt to become marsupials, 
but ran up on to the top platform before they attained the 
adult condition.” 
Moreover, it is taken for granted that, 7f the Moun- 
tain Limestone could speak, it would tell abundantly of 
Prototheria. Unfortunately the only utterance has 
been a few jaw bones; which are as likely to be Marsupial, 
as Monotrematous; and, having teeth, perhaps even more 
likely. But upon as small an amount of evidence as this, 
if it be evidence at all, his Prototherian theory is con- 
structed, together with all it involves. 
It is a bold effort to forge a more primeval link than 
has yet, by any valid evidence not to say proof, been 
discovered, to connect our Eutherian selves with proto- 
plasm through Prototherian types. 
Our own ancestors, it would seem, did not dawdle on 
the Metatherian platform, but became ‘adu/t’ without its 
assistance. 
Professor Huxley, in his ‘Nineteenth Century’ con- 
troversy, with Mr. Gladstone is more cautious; and 
contents himself with speculation upon the date of the 
appearance of Man upon this earth, in his comparison 
of the priority of existing Mammals. 
He says, although he admits that he is wsatisfied so 
late as the end of the year 1885, there is no evidence 
that any trace of Man has been found even in the Pliocene 
a 
