432 THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES 



tion,'^ "unity of design," etc., and to think that we give an ex- 

 planation when we only restate a fact. Any one whose disposition 

 leads him to attach more weight to unexplained difficulties than 

 to the explanation of a certain number of facts will certainly 

 reject the theory. A few naturalists, endowed with much flexibil- 

 ity of mind, and who have already begun to doubt the immu- 

 tability of species, may be influenced by this volume; but I 

 look with confidence to the future, to young and rising naturalists, 

 who will be able to view both sides of the question with im- 

 partiality. Whoever is led to believe that species are mutable will 

 do good service by conscientiously expressing his conviction; for 

 thus only can the load of prejudice by which this subject is over- 

 whelmed be removed. 



Several eminent naturalists have of late published their belief 

 that a multitude of reputed species in each genus are not real 

 species; but that other species are real, that is, have been in- 

 dependently created. This seems to me a strange conclusion to 

 arrive at. They admit that a multitude of forms, which till lately 

 they themselves thought were special creations, and which are 

 still thus looked at by the majority of naturalists, and which con- 

 sequently have all the external characteristic features of true spe- 

 cies — they admit that these have been produced by variation, but 

 they refuse to extend the same view to other and slightly differ- 

 ent forms. Nevertheless, they do not pretend that they can define, 

 or even conjecture, which are the created forms of life, and which 

 are those produced by secondary laws. They admit variation as 

 a vera causa in one case, they arbitrarily reject it in another, 

 without assigning any distinction in the two cases. The day will 

 come when this will be given as a curious illustration of the 

 blindness of preconceived opinion. These authors seem no more 

 startled at a miraculous act of creation than at an ordinary birth. 

 But do they really believe that at innumerable periods in the 

 earth's history certain elemental atoms have been commanded 

 suddenly to flash into living tissues? Do they believe that at each 

 supposed act of creation one individual or many were produced? 

 Were all the infinitely numerous kinds of animals and plants 

 created as eggs or seed, or as full grown? and in the case of mam- 

 mals, were they created bearing the false marks of nourishment 

 from the mother's womb? Undoubtedly some of these same ques- 

 tions cannot be answered by those who believe in the appearance 

 or creation of only a few forms of life, or of some one form alone. 

 It has been maintained by several authors that it is as easy to 

 believe in the creation of a million beings as of one; but Mauper- 



