64 HOMO V. DARWIN. 



serves man as a special weapon for tearing his enemies or 

 prey ; it may, therefore, as far as its proper function is 

 concerned, be considered as rudimentary." (Vol. i. p. 126.) 



Homo. Mr. Darwin has not proved, my Lord nor can 

 he prove that the proper function of this tooth in man is 

 for " tearing his enemies." No one, I should think, could 

 share this belief of Mr. Darwin but a semi-savage. 



Darwin. " In every large collection of human -skulls," 

 my Lord, " some may be found, as Hackel observes, with 

 the canine teeth projecting considerably beyond the others, 

 in the same manner, but in a less degree, as in the anthro- 

 pomorphous apes. In these cases, open spaces between the 

 teeth in the one jaw are left for the reception of the canines 

 belonging to the other jaw." (Vol. i. p. 126.) 



Homo. That shows, my Lord, that nature works after 

 an ideal plan. There is a typical form which she ever keeps 

 in view. 



Lord G. Mr. Darwin would, I presume, regard the cases 

 in question as instances of " reversion to some former and 

 ancient type of structure." 



Homo. They are certainly, so far, cases of resemblance, my 

 Lord ; but when Mr. Darwin insists that the projecting 

 canines which some few men exhibit, show reversion to a 

 former type, he is taking for granted cur descent from some 

 brutal progenitor. Now if, at times, man were to approxi- 

 mate unmistakeably to the image and likeness of the brute ; 

 if he were to come into existence occasionally with " a tail 

 and pointed ears," or with the hoofs of some quadruped, 

 or with feet like an ape's, there would be some show of 

 reason for this assumption. But there is certainly none in 

 the circumstance that, now and then, a man develops a 

 tooth which bears a remote resemblance to that of some 

 lower animal. The fact is, my Lord, that we know far too 



