154 ON CERTAIN MODERN VIEWS 



ON CERTAIN MODERN VIEWS CONCERNING THE ORDI-> 

 NAL ARRANGEMENT OF THE HIGHER MAMMALIA. 



BY DAVID TUCKER, M.B., B.A., T.C.D., ETC. 



All who have devoted any attention to the science of Zoology must 

 be aware that the two best known systems of classification are those 

 of Linneens and of Cuvier. They must also be aware that there are 

 some points on which the two systems are at variance. This, of course, 

 was to be expected, as Cuvier had the advantage of travelling for a 

 considerable distance on a track which Linnaeus had vastly improved, 

 if not almost entirely created. We have also to bear in mind that, 

 labouring in an epoch in-which civilization had become somewhat more 

 advanced — a season of greater intellectual and commercial activity — 

 the opportunities which Cuvier enjoyed of increasing his stock of 

 knowledge, and of verifying his doctrines by the examination of actual 

 specimens, were much more ample than those which fell to the lot of 

 Linnseus. 



Linnaeus appears to have arranged the Mammalia chiefly with a re- 

 gard to their dentition, whilst Cuvier, to a certain extent, revived the 

 plan of Aristotle, which had a view to general anatomical distinctions. 

 In the ordinal arrangement of the higher Mammalia there is also a 

 considerable difference between the two systems. The characteristics 

 which Linnaeus ascribes to the first order of this class, are — " Front 

 teeth incisors ; the superior, four ; parallel. Two pectoral mammae." 

 In consequence of the frequent concurrence of these characteristic 

 marks in individuals in the animal kingdom, this order, which he has 

 named Primates, extended itself to very large dimensions. It com- 

 menced so low as animals of a rodent or insectivore type, and ascended 

 as high as Man himself. The bat, the lemur, the monkey, the anthro- 

 poid ape and the Caucasian man were thus grouped together in rather 

 ludicrous proximity. After a time this arrangement ceased to give 

 satisfaction to the scientific world. Naturalists who had devoted some 

 attention to the study of comparative anatomy, amongst whom was 

 John Hunter, perceived that the principles were not correct, which led 

 to this close approximation of all those apparently diverse- genera. 

 And when Baron Cuvier, in his justly celebrated " Regne Animal" 

 introduced a new and more scientific system of arrangement, that of 



