^Ir. J. 1). Dana on Species. 491 



have been a very clumsy method of accompHshing the same 

 result, to have made him of many species, all admitting of inde- 

 finite or nearly indefinite hybridization, in direct opposition to a 

 grand principle elsewhere recognized in the organic kingdoms. 

 It would have been using a process that produces impotence or 

 nothing among animals, for the perpetuation and progress of the 

 human race. 



There are other ways of accounting for the limited produc- 

 tiveness of the Mulatto, without appealing to a distinction of 

 species. There are causes, independent of mixture, which are 

 making the Indian to melt away before the white man, the Sand- 

 wich Islander and all savage people to sink into the ground be- 

 fore the power and energy of higher intelligence. They dis- 

 appear like plants beneath those of stronger root and growth, 

 being depressed morally, intellectually and physically, contami- 

 nated by new vices, tainted variously by foreign disease, and 

 dwindled in all their hopes and aims and means of progress, 

 throush an overshadowins; race. 



We have therefore reason to believe, from man's fertile inter- 

 mixture, that he is one in species ; and that all organic species 

 are divine ap])ointments which cannot be obliterated, unless by 

 annihilating the individuals representing the species. 



It may be said, that different species in the inorganic world 

 combine so as to form new units, and why may they not in the 

 organic ? It is true they combine, but not by indefinite blend- 

 ings. Thei"e is a definite law of multiples, and this is the central 

 idea in the system of inorganic nature. In organic nature, such 

 a law of multiples, if existing, would be general, as in the inor- 

 ganic ; it would be an essential part of the system and should 

 be easily verified, while, in fact, observation lends it no support, 

 not even enough to have suggested the hypothesis. 



In one kingdom, the inorganic, there is multiplication of kinds 

 of units by combination, according to the law of multiples, and no 

 reproduction ; while in the organic, there is reproduction of like 

 from like, and no multiplication of kinds by combination. And 

 thus the two departments of living and dead nature widely diverge. 



Neither does the possibility of mere mixture among inorganic 

 substances afford any analogy to sustain the idea of possible 

 hybrid mixture indefinitely perpetuated, among living beings. 

 The mechanical aggregation of units that make up ordinary 

 mixture, is one thing ; and the combination that would alter a 

 germ, one of the units in organic species, even to its funda- 

 mental nature, is quite another. This last is not aggregation. 

 It is as different from mere mixture as is chemical combination, 

 and stands somewhat in the same relation, so that the analogy 

 has no bearing on the question. 



32* 



