THE KINSHIP OF LIFE. 45 



of species in any group who entertains the old notion 

 as to their distinct origin. There is not one who could 

 hold this view and look an animal in the face ! 



And for this change we have to thank Darwin. " It 

 is easy to plough where the field is cleared," and what 

 he first of all saw clearly we can not fail to see now. 

 The fact is that every student of species and of the 

 facts of geographical distribution has reached, willingly 

 or unwillingly, the conclusion that species are not im- 

 mutable ; that those differences by which he tried to 

 discriminate the groups of organisms which he calls spe- 

 cies were not differences originating in the act of crea- 

 tion, but produced in some way by outside influences 

 or by the organism's reaction in adjustment to these in- 

 fluences. One might safely pledge himself to convert 

 to some phase of the development theory any honest 

 and intelligent man who would spend a month in a care- 

 ful study of a large collection of specimens in any group 

 in which the existing species are found over wide areas 

 on the surface of the earth. The study of squirrels, 

 eels, catfishes, pine trees, asters, butterflies, clams, snails, 

 horses, or men — any of these will serve to accomplish 

 this purpose. 



The general acceptance of the Darwinian theory by 

 naturalists is not due exclusively to the Origin of Spe- 

 cies or to any of the numerous com- 

 The acceptance mentaries and expositions which have 



of the theory ^ ^i, u ^ t.. • r „ 



come from other hands. It arises from 

 of descent. 



the results of the studies themselves. 

 No authority has compelled it, for Darwin's influence 

 was not, like that of Cuvier or of Agassiz, the force of an 

 overmastering personality. He was rather the voice of 

 Nature. His word was the impersonal word of Nature 

 herself. To see truthfully is to see with Darwin's eyes. 

 The idea of development gives the only clew by which 



