ORIGIN OF LIFE. l6l 



ing the great phenomena of progressive development, 

 and of which the origin is perfectly comprehensible by 

 variability alone, or in any case, as we have seen, by 

 variability with the co-operation of isolation. The value 

 of natural selection is in no way deteriorated by the 

 possibility of explaining the purely morphological 

 species without its aid. In certain cases of mimicry, 

 or the formation of natural protective masks and imi- 

 tations, and for the explanation of organic beauty, 

 natural selection seems inadequate. But what does this 

 prove, but that, as all know, future generations must 

 needs carry on the edifice ? The additions which the 

 presence of the theory of selection has been able to 

 supply are scarcely worthy of mention. 



As the type has become the family, and the system, 

 as the shortest expression of tJie kindred relations of 

 organisms, requires at the root of the genealogical tree 

 a number of the lowest and simplest organisms, or per- 

 haps one single primordial form, we must come to an 

 understanding as to the problem of the beginning of life. 

 Even quite recently, in March 1873, Max Miiller, in 

 accordance with an opinion shared by many, has again 

 proclaimed " the Darwinian tlieory vulnerable at the 

 beginning and at the end."" Whether any considerable 

 points of attack are offered by the final proposition of 

 Darwinism, namely, the application of natural selection 

 to man, and his sole characteristic peculiarity, language, 

 we shall have another opportunity of inquiring. But 

 what the renowned linguist terms the vulnerable begin- 

 ning of Darwinism, the origin of life, has in fact nothing 

 to do with actual Darwinism, or natural selection, unless 

 the principle of selection be extended to the inorganic 



