TRANSMUTABLE. 131 



another, there will be a tendency to diminution, 

 or even extinction. Therefore the range of species 

 will tend also to be sharply defined, and they will 

 become in the neutral territory rarer and rarer, 

 and so transitional varieties are lost. 



But in order to uphold this view, Mr. Darwin 

 is obliged to have recourse to a deduction in- 

 consistent with his theory. He says that his 

 species are already defined objects, (however they 

 may have become so,) not blending one into 

 another by insensible gradations. This appears 

 to me nothing more or less than a surrender of 

 his doctrine in toto, and an adoption of that of 

 the author of the "Vestiges." It is the forms 

 between the primogenitor and its transmuted de- 

 scendant that we want as proof of Mr. Darwin's 

 theory, and these he cannot produce, and con- 

 sequently he places himself out of court. 



The next difficulty which Mr, Darwin deals 

 with is 



2. On the origin and transitions of organic 

 beings with peculiar habits and structure. This 

 leads to an answer of the very obvious question, 

 How could a "land carnivorous animal have been 

 converted into one with aquatic habits; for how 

 could the animal in its transitional state have 

 subsisted?" (Page 179.) 



Mr. Darwin answers this boldly, by stating 

 that "within the same group carnivorous animals 

 exist, having every intermediate grade between 

 truly aquatic and strictly terrestrial habits." He 

 instances the Mustela vis on of North America, 



