* 
SYSTEMATIC ZOOLOGY—GILL. 461 
the sentiment then prevalent was reflected by one who enjoyed a high 
reputation for a time as a “ philosophical zoologist ”—William Swain- 
son. In “A Treatise on the Geography and Classification of Ani- 
mals ” (1836, p. 173), the author complained that “ Cuvier rested his 
distinctions * * * upon characters which, however good, are not 
always comprehensible, except to the anatomist. The utility of his 
system, for general use, is consequently much diminished, and it gives 
the student an impression (certainly an erroneous one) that the in- 
ternal, and not the external, structure of an animal alone decides its 
place in nature.” It was long before such a mischievous opinion was 
discarded. 
Cuvier was regarded almost universally by his contemporaries, and 
long afterwards, in the words of his intellectual successor, Louis 
Agassiz, as “ the greatest zoologist of all time.” « In view of the facts 
already cited and innumerable others that could be added, however, 
the contemporary verdict must be somewhat modified. Cuvier was a 
very great man of most impressive personality, wide versatility, ex- 
traordinary industry, vast knowledge of zoological and anatomical 
details, an excellent historian, a useful critic, and of good judgment 
in affairs generally, but, although a greater all-round man, as a 
systematic zoologist he was not the equal of a couple of his French 
contemporaries, Blainville and Latreille. We have either to admit 
this conclusion or confess that our now universally admitted views 
are wrong. Nevertheless, Cuvier’s work was of great importance, 
and he first brought to the aid of systematic zoology the new science 
of vertebrate paleontology. 
CUVIER AND PALEONTOLOGY. 
The animals, and especially the vertebrates, of past ages were prac- 
tically unknown to the early zoologists, and when they had large col- 
lections, as did Volta of the fishes of Mount Bolca, they identified 
them with modern species, or, with Scheuchzer, might consider a 
giant salamander as a man witness of the deluge—* Homo diluvii 
testis!” It was not until Cuvier, with superior knowledge of skeletal 
details, examined numerous bones unearthed from the Tertiary beds 
about Paris, that the complete distinction of animals of ancient forma- 
tions from living species was recognized. Then was afforded the first 
glimpse of extinct faunas destined to far outnumber the existing one, 
but so imperfect was the great paleontologist’s foresight of what lay 
in store for the future that he enunciated a dogma which was long ac- 
cepted as sacrosanct; he called it the law of correlation of structure. 
@ Agassiz, *“* Essay on Classification,” p. 286, 
