284 EVOLUTION [Chap. IV 



Letter 204 I knew, of course, of the Cuvicrian view of classification ; ' 

 but I think that most naturalists look for something further, 

 and search for " the natural system," — " for the plan on which 

 the Creator has worked," etc., etc. It is this further element 

 which I believe to be simply genealogical. 



But I should be very glad to have your answer (either 

 when we meet or by note) to the following case, taken by 

 itself, and not allowing yourself to look any further than to 

 the point in question. Grant all races of man descended 

 from one race — grant that all the structure of each race of 

 man were perfectly known — grant that a perfect table of the 

 descent of each race was perfectly known — grant all this, and 

 then do you not think that most would prefer as the best 

 classification, a genealogical one, even if it did occasionally 

 put one race not quite so near to another, as it would have 

 stood, if collocated by structure alone? Generally, we may 

 safely presume, that the resemblance of races and their 

 pedigrees would go together. 



I should like to hear what you would say on this purely 

 theoretical case. 



It might be asked why is development so all-potent in 

 classification's I fully admit it is? I believe it is because 

 it depends on, and best betrays, genealogical descent ; but 

 this is too large a point to enter on. 



Letter 205 To C. Lyell. 



Down, Dec. 7th [1867]. 



I send by this post the article in the Victorian Institute 

 with respect to frogs' spawn. If you remember in your boy- 

 hood having ever tried to take a small portion out of the 

 water, you will remember that it is most difficult. I believe 

 all the birds in the world might alight every day on the spawn 

 of batrachians, and never transport a single ovum. With 

 respect to the young of molluscs, undoubtedly if the bird to 

 which they were attached alighted on the sea, they would 

 be instantly killed ; but a land-bird would, I should think, 

 never alight except under dire necessity from fatigue. This, 



1 Cuvier proved that "animals cannot be arranged in a single series, 

 but that there are several distinct plans of organisation to be observed 

 among them, no one of which, in its highest and most complicated 

 modification, leads to any of the others" (Huxley's Darwiniana, p. 215). 



