496 NATURAL HISTORY OF MAN. 



It is this 'one touch of nature' testified in tears, which 

 decides the question of unity of species to the common feeling 

 of mankind as entirely as it does to the observations of the 

 naturalist, or the reasonings of the philosopher. 



Though our limits have compelled us greatly to curtail 

 this discussion, we have pursued it sufficiently to show how 

 much it governs the second question proposed, viz. Whether, 

 though the species be one and single, there were not several 

 pairs of this species placed separately on the earth ? and 

 possibly under certain diversities of type, corresponding 

 more or less with those of the dominant races which now 

 exist ? It will be seen that this question is already in part 

 answered in the one preceding it; and that the grounds of 

 argument in the two cases are closely analogous throughout. 

 It is true, that in the latter case they are chiefly of a negative 

 kind, and do not admit of so determinate a conclusion. We 

 can never prove by any human evidence that it may not have 

 pleased the Creator to give origin to the race and its varieties 

 in this particular manner. The solution cannot be rendered 

 other than one of probability ; but we think the amount of 

 probability such as may fairly justify the inference at which 

 we arrive. 



We are entitled, first, to ask the same question here as 

 before ; Where is the limit to be placed to this multiplica- 

 tion of pairs, if intended to express the several types or 

 varieties of man ? Fischer, in his Synopsis Animalium, 

 affirms the existence of seven forms distinct in origin. 

 Agassiz has given the sanction of his name to the same view 

 of a plurality of stocks. Other writers have confined them to 

 the Caucasian, Mongolian, and Negro types; and if the 

 doctrine of unity be abandoned, these doubtless offer the 

 most obvious selection. But looking at the numerous 

 varieties of mankind, and the manner in which they are 



