'•,'"" "^"M"" 



13 



has grown. As they are only exceptionally seen, the latter sup 

 position is perhaps the more probable. Peculiarities of this kind, 

 to which perhaps heretofore too little attention has been given, 

 are of some importance with reference to the controversies re- 

 specting Eozoon. 



It may be said, in connection with the attacks in question, that 

 if Enzoon is an object of which so many and stranu;e explanations 

 can be given, it is probable that no certainty whatever can be 

 attained as to its real nature. On the other hand it is fair to 

 argue that, if the opponents of its animal nature are driven to 

 misrepresentation and to wild and incoherent theories, there is 

 the more reason to repose confidence in the sober view of its 

 origin, consistent with its geological relations and microscopic 

 characters, which has commended itself to Carpenter, Gumbel, 

 Rupert Jones, Sterry Hunt, and a host of other competent 

 naturalists and geologists. For my own part the arguments ad- 

 duced by opponents, and the re-examination of specimens which 

 they have sugge.sted, have served to make my original opinion as 

 to its nature seem bettor supported and more probable; though 

 of course T would be far "rom being dogmatic on such a subject, 

 or claiming any stronger conclu.sioii than that of a rea.sonable 

 probability, which may be increased as new facts develop them- 

 selves, but cannot amount to absolute certainty until the discovery 

 of Laurentian rocks in an unaltered state shall enable us to com- 

 pare their fossils more easily with those of later formations. 



In point of fact, the evidence for the organic nature of a fo.ssil 

 Buch as that in question, is necessarily cumulative, and depends 

 on its mode of occurrence and state of mineralisation, as well as 

 on its general form and micro.'^copic structure ; and it is perhaps 

 hopeless to expect that any considerable number of naturalists 

 will be induced to undertake the investigations neces.sary to form 

 an independent opinion on the subject. It may be hoped, how- 

 ever, that they Wiil fairly weigh the evidence presented, and will 

 also take into consideration the difficulty of accounting for such 

 forms and structures except on the hypothesis of an organic 



origin. 



