a a: 
i if) 
THE GENEALOGY OF ANIMALS 113 
_ —the mere ticking of the clock, which he mistakes 
for its function. And there seems to be no reply 
_ to this inquiry, any more than to the further, not 
irrational, question, why trouble one’s self about 
_ matters which are out of reach, when the working 
of the mechanism itself, which is of infinite 
_ practical importance, affords scope for all our 
energies ? 
Professor Haeckel has invented a new and con- 
venient name “ Dysteleology,’ for the study of 
the “purposelessnesses” which are observable in 
living organisms—such as the multitudinous cases 
of rudimentary and apparently useless structures. 
I confess, however, that it has often appeared to 
me that the facts of Dysteleology cut two ways. 
If we are to assume, as evolutionists in general do, 
that useless organs atrophy, such cases as the 
existence of lateral rudiments of toes, in the foot 
of a horse, place us in a dilemma. For, either 
these rudiments are of no use to the animal, in 
which case, considering that the horse has existed 
in its present form since the Pliocene epoch, they 
surely ought to have disappeared ; or they are of 
some use to the animal, in which case they are of 
no use as arguments against Teleology. A similar, 
but still stronger, argument may be based upon 
the existence of teats, and even functional mam- 
mary glands, in male mammals. Numerous cases 
_ of “ Gynzecomasty,” or functionally active breasts 
in men, are on record, though there is no mam- 
VOL. Il 1 
