t TRANSFORMISM 25 



be asked whether the same living matter presents 

 enough plasticity to take in turn such different forms 

 as those of a fish, a reptile and a bird. But, to this 

 question, observation gives a peremptory answer. It 

 shows that up to a certain period in its development the 

 embryo of the bird is hardly distinguishable from that of 

 the reptile, and that the individual develops, throughout 

 the embryonic life in general, a series of transforma 

 tions comparable to those through which, according 

 to the theory of evolution, one species passes into 

 another. A single cell, the result of the combination 



O 



of two cells, male and female, accomplishes this work 

 by dividing. Every day, before our eyes, the highest 

 forms of life are springing from a very elementary form. 

 Experience, then, shows that the most complex has been 

 able to issue from the most simple by way of evolu 

 tion. Now, has it arisen so, as a matter of fact ? Pale 

 ontology, in spite of the insufficiency of its evidence, 

 invites us to believe it has ; for, where it makes out the 

 order of succession of species with any precision, this 

 order is just what considerations drawn from embryo- 

 geny and comparative anatomy would lead any one 

 to suppose, and each new paleontological discovery 

 brings transformism a new confirmation. Thus, the 

 proof drawn from mere observation is ever being 

 strengthened, while, on the other hand, experiment 

 is removing the objections one by one. The recent 

 experiments of H. de Vries, for instance, by showing 

 that important variations can be produced suddenly 

 and transmitted regularly, have overthrown some of 

 the greatest difficulties raised by the theory. They 

 have enabled us greatly to shorten the time biological 

 evolution seems to demand. They also render us 

 less exacting toward paleontology. So that, all things 



