SKELETON. 



647 



process produced to sternal junction ; and 

 I shall hereafter prove that the coracoid 

 process of the mammal scapula is as distinct 

 a piece from the coracoid bone of the bird, 

 as the centrum of a vertebra is from the 

 costa. In order to understand aright the law 

 of formation, it is as necessary to know what 

 parts are identical and different in two or more 

 skeletons, as it is to know what parts are 

 identical and different in two or more verte- 

 brae ; an error in the one or in the other is 

 fatal to a proper understanding of the law 

 which governs the development of both. 



While we view the clavicle (b,Jig. 470.) in 

 connection with the cervical rib behind (), 

 we then find that the entire of fig. 470. repre- 

 sents a quantity equal to the thoracic arche- 

 type, inclosing a visceral or haemal space ven- 

 trad, and a neural space dorsad. This same 

 whole quantity of the archetype is also seen in 

 jig. 471., where (5) the furculum joins c, the 

 sternum, and points dorsad to a, the cervical 



Fig. 470. 



The cervical vertebra, with the rib, a, the clavicles, 

 b, and first sternal piece, c, of the crocodile, form- 

 ing, in their connected totality, the sterno-costo- 

 vertebral whole quantity. 



rib of the cervical vertebra. In like manner 

 Jig. 472. shows the dimensions of a thoracic 



Fig. 471. 



rib with (b) the coracoid bone (so called in the 

 bird) and joining (c) the first sternal piece. 



Fig. 472. 



The cervical vertebra, with its rib a, pointing to the 

 furcular bone b, and the sternal junction c, which 

 parts in their totality form the sterno-costo-ver- 

 tebral quantity in the albatross. 



whole quantity when we take (a) the cervical 



The cervical vertebra, with the rib a, the cora- 

 coids b, and the first sternal piece c of the albatross, 

 forming the whole quantity. 



When the whole quantities of the sterno- 

 costo-vertebral circles suffer a dismemberment 

 of their integral parts, then it is that special or 

 diversified objects first appear then if is that 

 clavicles become special to coracoid bones, and 

 both to ribs then it is that the anatomists 

 pursue, with special distinctions, fragmental 

 plurality, and lose sight of the intelligible 

 form of unity on the whole- 



Osteogenie is constant to<the law of serial 

 order. As rib follows rib in serial order a cir- 

 cumstance which indicates the homological 

 cast of both so rib, and coracoid, and clavicle, 

 which take serial order, indicate by this same 

 fact their own identity or homological relation. 

 But the mammal's coracoid process is a part 

 distinct from the bird's costiform coracoid 

 bone. The former never takes place of the 

 latter, but is a part proper to the scapula 

 alone.* 



* Professor Owen's idea of the relationship of the 

 mammal scapulary member and its coracoid element 

 to the occipital vertebra, must imply that the cora- 

 coid clavicle of the bird is (if the mammal coracoid 

 process and the bird's coracoid bone be considered 

 by him to be homologous parts) also referable to the 

 occipital vertebra. This homological relation, I am 

 bound to say, I could never discover; and if the 

 asserted relationship between these parts shall be 

 ever received as an opinion true to nature, the 

 learned author is certainly the discoverer. For my 

 own part, however, I must confess myself no convert 

 to the belief that so large an amount of displace- 

 ment between any two numbers of a whole quantity, 

 such as that which, according to the author, is 

 instanced in the totality of the occipital vertebra, 

 taken with the scapulary limb, ever occurs, but I am 

 rather impressed with the opinion which the im- 

 mortal Goethe advanced respecting the fixity of 

 place which osseous pieces of the endo-skeleton in- 

 variably hold : " L'osteoge'nie est constante, en ce 

 qu'une meme os est toujours a la meme place." 

 CEuv. d'Hist. Nat. p. 41. 



T T 4 



