40 UNIVERSAL EVOLUTION 



not be in such embryos, which means all embryos, any 

 real parallelism between the ontogeny, and the phylo- 

 geny. "The relation between the two is always that of 

 an inexact parallelism." This means that, in a general 

 way, there are points in the ontogeny that can well be 

 interpreted as indicating a parallel to the phylogeny. 

 More thorough experimentation is needed in embryology 

 to determine in just what points the parallelism consists. 



CLASSIFICATION. The usual proofs of organic evolu- 

 tion by natural selection, or the survival of the fittest, 

 are drawn from classification, morphology, embryology, 

 paleontology, and geographical distribution. These are 

 all important branches of biology. While the scope of 

 this volume will not permit an elaborate treatment of 

 these very interesting studies, yet a few facts, prominent 

 in each, will perhaps stimulate the reader's attention 

 toward a larger study of those scientists ' works who have 

 made a more elaborate practical analysis of them. 



Naturalists, prior to Darwin, had busied themselves 

 in making collections of specimens, and studying the 

 facts of affinity and variation, without seeming to 

 arrive at any theory regarding the origin of forms. 

 They took for granted the statements in Genesis, and 

 classified accordingly. Species were asserted to be 

 immutable ; each the result of a definite creative act, 

 and each separated from every other by impassable 

 differences. These were the bases of the Linnean 

 classification, and also of Cuvier's. The naturalists, St. 

 Hilaire, Lamarck, and Erasmus Darwin were excep- 

 tions. They conceived the idea of evolution founded 

 on methods not properly established by science at that 

 time. The theory was not adopted by naturalists until 

 a more correct method was established by Darwin and 

 Wallace. 



