262 SPECULATIVE SCIENCE 



as probably far to exceed the number of individuals which have 

 existed of any one variety. If this be true, it would be more 

 probable that no two specimens preserved as fossils should be of 

 one variety than that we should find a great many specimens col- 

 lected from a very few varieties, provided, of course, the chances of 

 preservation are equal for all individuals. But this assumption 

 may be denied, and some may think it probable that the condi- 

 tions favourable to preservation only recur rarely, at remote 

 periods, and never last long enough to show a gradual unbroken 

 change. It would rather seem probable that fragments, at 

 least, of perfect series would be preserved of those beings which 

 lead similar lives favourable to their preservation as fossils. 

 Have any fragments of these Darwinian series been found where 

 the individuals merge from one variety insensibly to another ? 



It is really strange that vast numbers of perfectly similar 

 specimens should be found, the chances against their perpetua- 

 tion as fossils are so great ; but it is also very strange that the 

 specimens should be so exactly alike as they are, if, in fact, they 

 came and vanished by a gradual change. It is, however, not 

 worth while to insist much on this argument, which by suitable 

 hypotheses might be answered, as by saying, that the changes 

 were often quick, taking only a few myriad ages, and that then 

 a species was permanent for a vastly longer time, and that if we 

 have not anywhere a gradual change clearly recorded, the steps 

 from variety to variety are gradually being diminished as more 

 specimens are discovered. These answers do not seem to us 

 sufficient, but the point is hardly worth contesting, when other 

 arguments directly disproving the possibility of the assumed 

 change have been advanced. 



These arguments are cumulative. If it be true that no 

 species can vary beyond defined limits, it matters little whether 

 natural selection would be efficient in producing definite varia- 

 tions. If natural selection, though it does select the stronger 

 average animals and under peculiar circumstances may develop 

 special organs already useful, can never select new imperfect 

 organs such as are produced in sports, then, even though 

 eternity were granted, and no limit assigned to the possible 

 changes of animals, Darwin's cannot be the true explanation of 

 the manner in which change has been brought about. Lastly, 



