424 Rev. S. Haughton on the Origin of Species. 



theory of Progression^ in whicli^ however, it is implicitly in- 

 volved. 



I make no account of Mr. Darwin's geological additions to 

 Lamarck, for two reasons. In the first place, the laws of geo- 

 graphical distribution explained by geological change are not ad 

 rem, and were previously fully treated of by BufFon and Forbes ; 

 and in the second place, Mr. Darwin admits that the facts of 

 geology are opposed to his (Lamarck's) theory; and they are 

 pleasantly alluded to as the geological difficulty ! So far as the 

 history of life on the globe indicates a progression, Lamarck is 

 entitled to the benefit of it — as in the case of mammals and 

 plants, — but certainly not to the exclusion of the facts in favour 

 of degradation — such as the case of Fishes, Reptiles, and Cepha- 

 lopods, which must be credited to the account of Bufibn and his 

 followers. 



Lamarck says distinctly — " Ce ne sont pas les organes, c'est- 

 a-dire, la nature et la forme des parties du corps d'un animal, qui 

 ont donne lieu a ses habitudes et a ses facultes particulieres ; 

 mais ce sont au contraire ses habitudes, sa maniere de vivre, et 

 les circonstances dans lesquelles se sont rencontres les individus 

 dont il provient, qui ont avec le temps coustitue la forme de son 

 corps, le nombre et I'etat de ses organes, enfin les facultes dont 

 il jouit." 



This statement implies all that is essential in Mr. Darwin's 

 " law of Natural Selection," which, by its prominence, fills in 

 his system the place occupied by the law of Imitation in the 

 original theory of Lamarck. This difference arises from the 

 difterence of the points of view of the Frenchman and the 

 Englishman — a difference characteristic of the two races. The 

 Frenchman, with the vivacity and perception of the ridiculous 

 belonging to his nation, seizes upon the quality most likely to 

 elevate a monkey into a man, selects the faculty of imitation, 

 and, with a bitter satire, endows his monkey with the human 

 desire to better his condition, and lift himself above his brother 

 chatterers. He thus magnifies the monkey power of imita- 

 tion — which is truly wonderful, and extends to the most extra- 

 ordinary actions — into the position of a law of nature, sufficient 

 to create man ! The Englishman, on the other hand, firmly 

 believes his theory, and, with a confident faith in the power of 

 food and comfort, equally characteristic of his country, elevates 

 the desire to supply the stomach into a law of sufficient force to 

 convert an eel into an elephant, or an oyster into an orang- 

 outan. 



Other theorists, whose name is legion, have printed their 

 crude fancies, and have met with numerous readers among the 

 young and inexperienced, the sciolists of science. It is not to 



