TRANSMUTABLE. 49 



and they may always be distinguished by this 

 obvious character that the pupil of the eye of 

 the dog is always round, whilst that of the fox 

 is oval when contracted." (Animal Physiology, 

 533.) 



Mr. Darwin alludes to "monsters," arid to the 

 number of cases he could adduce, in which parts 

 of importance, physiologically, vary in individuals 

 of the same species. But what are these cases 

 in comparison to the vast bulk of normal forms? 

 And again, are not these deviations in almost 

 every case degradations from the natural standard 

 of structure? And are they not frequently pro- 

 duced by an altered or an unnatural mode of 

 life? You take the larva of a caterpillar from 

 its tree out of doors, and you feed it in con- 

 finement, and then are astonished to find some 

 deviation from its normal character. 



It appears to me that the introduction of these 

 accidental or induced abnormities of form, as an 

 illustration of even a tendency towards the 

 transmutation of species, is feeble in the extreme. 

 The proof we want, is not that structure will 

 vary, or that even induced peculiarities are in- 

 herited, but that such change or inheritance is 

 a natural law by which one species is ultimately 

 changed into another. I repeat, that in Mr. 

 Darwin's book we have not the shadow of a 

 proof of this. 



"But," said an intelligent man to me in the 

 course of conversation, "you do not mean to say 

 that Mr. Darwin argues that a zoophyte is de- 



