i 
: 
Pe 
‘ 
4 
4 
4 
t 
’ 
Miscellaneous. 225 
presented in its true light by Mr. Darwin ; but this process of raising 
breeds by the selection of favourable subjects is in no way similar to 
that which regulates specific differences. Nothing is more remote 
from the truth than the attempted parallelism between the breeds of 
domesticated animals and the species of wild ones. Did there exist 
such a parallelism as Darwin maintains, the difference among the 
domesticated breeds should be akin to the differences among wild 
species, and afford a clue to determine their relative degree of affinity 
by a comparison with the pedigrees of well-known domesticated races. 
Again, if there were any such parallelism, the distinctive character- 
istics of different breeds should be akin to the differences which exist 
between fossil species of earlier periods and those of the same genera 
now living. Now let any one familiar with the fossil species of the 
genera Bos and Canis compare them with the races of our cattle and 
of our dogs; and he will find no correspondence whatever between 
them, for the simple reason that they do not owe their existence to 
the same causes. It must therefore be distinctly stated that Mr. 
Darwin has failed to establish a connexion between the mode of 
raismg domesticated breeds and the cause or causes to which wild 
animals owe their specific differences. 
It is true Mr. Darwin states that the close affinity existing among 
animals can only be explained by a community of descent, and he 
goes so far as to represent these affinities as evidence of such a 
genealogical relationship ; but I apprehend that the meaning of the 
words he uses has misled him into the belief that he had found the 
clue to phenomena which he does not even seem correctly to under- 
stand. There is nothing parallel between the relations of animals 
belonging to the same genus or the same family and the relations 
between the progeny of common ancestors. In the one case we have 
the result of a physiological law regulating reproduction, and in the 
other, affinities which no observation has thus far shown to be in any 
way connected with reproduction. The most closely allied species of 
the same genus, or the different species of closely allied genera, or the 
different genera of one and the same natural family, embrace repre- 
sentatives which at some period or other of their growth resemble 
one another more closely than the nearest blood relations; and yet 
we know that they are only stages of development of different species 
distinct from one another at every period of their life. The embryo 
of our common freshwater turtle (Chrysemys picta) and the embryo 
of our snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) resemble one another 
far more than the different species of Chrysemys in their adult state ; 
and yet not a single fact can be adduced to show that any one egg 
of an animal has ever produced an individual of any species but its 
own. A young snake resembles a young turtle or a young bird 
much more than any two species of snakes resemble one another ; 
and yet they go on reproducing their kinds, and nothing but their 
kinds. So that no degree of affinity, however close, can, in the pre- 
sent state of our science, be urged as exhibiting any evidence of com- 
munity of descent, while the power that imparted all their peculiari- 
ties to the primitive eggs of all the species now living side by side 
