2614 The Zoologist — June, 1871. 



gave forth a much larger diverticulum or caecum than that now existing. 

 The foot, judging from the condition of the great toe in the foetus, was then 

 prehensile ; and our progenitors, no doubt, were arboreal in tbeir habits, 

 frequenting some warm forest-clad land. The males were provided with 

 great canine teeth, which served them as formidable weapons." — Vol. i. 

 p. 206. 



This, it will be seen, is the announcement in the first volume, 

 and the conclusion thus announced is repeated still more ex- 

 plicitly, but with a slight variation, at the close of the second : 

 here it is. 



" By considering the embrj-ological structure of man, — the homologies 

 which he presents with the lower animals, — the rudiments which he retains, 

 — and the reversions to which he is liable, we can partly recall in imagina- 

 tion the former condition of our early progenitors ; and can approximately 

 place them in their proper position in the zoological scries. We thus learn 

 that man is descended from a hairy quadruped, furnished with a tail and 

 pointed ears, probably arboreal in its habits and an inhabitant of the Old 

 World. Tbis creature, if its whole structure had been examined by a natu- 

 ralist, would have been classed among the Quadrumana, as surely as would 

 the common and stiU more aucieut progenitors of the Old and New World 

 monkeys. The Quadrumana and all the higher mammals are probably 

 derived from an ancient marsupial animal, and this through a long line of 

 diversified forms, either from some reptile-like or some ampbibian-like 

 creature, aud this again from some fish-Iike animal. In the dim obscurity 

 of the past we can see that the early progenitor of all the Vertebrata must 

 have been an aquatic animal provided with branchiae, with the two sexes 

 united in the same individual, and with the most important organs of the 

 body (such as the brain and heart) imperfectly developed. This animal 

 seems to have been more hke the larvae of our existing marine Ascidians 

 than any other known form." — Vol. ii. p. 389. 



Most of ray readers will agree with me on two points. First, that 

 it is extremely unwise to intermingle Darwinism and Theology; 

 aud it therefore may be most plausibly and fairly asked. Why then 

 seek to intermix them ? the answer is that, Secondly, It is im- 

 possible to keep them separate. If man be lineally descended 

 from an ape or some ape-like creature or ape-like progenitor, 

 and if at some remote period his ancestors underwent a change 

 from jelly-fishes, or from fish-like animals, or amphibiau-like 

 creatures, or reptile-like creatures, or from marsupial animals, 

 or from Old World monkeys, and this lineage is expressly 

 set forth, then it follows that the assertion so emphatically made in 



