90 SPECIES NOT 



in each to perform the same abstract end? In 

 the fish and the bird that end is progression 

 the one through the water, the other through the 

 air. In man the use is more varied, and the 

 arrangement of parts is more varied also; but 

 even as a means of progression how useful is 

 the human hand! In running, walking, swimming, 

 how much assistance is given by the hand of 

 man; but it is destined for other purposes con- 

 nected with a higher organization, and for which 

 it is variously, beautifully, and inimitably adapted. 



But beyond the mere expression of the same 

 means of exercising a similar function, there is 

 really no resemblance between these so-called ho- 

 mological organs. Why were the bones of the 

 whale's limb made in the form of a paddle, ex- 

 cept to propel it through the water? Why were 

 the shaft bones of the wing of the bird made 

 hollow, and filled with air, unless it were to give 

 it buoyancy and lightness as a wing? Why 

 were the bones of the human hand made in neither 

 of these types, unless it were destined to form 

 an organ for grasping, for prehension? 



But then again look at Mr. Darwin's deduction 

 that all lung-breathing animals have been derived 

 from a type having an organ like the swim 

 bladder of the fish? That the lung, say >f 

 man, the most exquisite and elaborate piece of 

 Divine workmanship in the whole field of nature, 

 ^iould be merely an altered bag used by fishes 

 generally for the same purpose as the hollow 

 bones of the bird, or in particular instances 



