22 



SCIENCE. 



[N. a. Vol. I. Xo. 1. 



to certain purposes, while Anaxagoras at- 

 tributed adaptations in nature to intelligent 

 design and was thus the founder of Tele- 

 ology. But as Aristotle was the father of 

 natural historj' so was he the first scientific 

 evolutionist, being the earliest to conceive 

 of the chain of being from polyps to man, 

 a view afterwards generally held until La- 

 marck replaced it bj' his truer simile of a 

 branching tree. The great Grreek natural- 

 ist and anatomist understood the principle 

 of adaptation of organs in its modern sense, 

 discovered the law of the physiological 

 division of labor, and conceived of life as 

 the function of the organism ; was not a 

 vitalist ; understood the doctrine of hered- 

 ity, atavism or reversion ; and finally, with 

 all his errors and misconceptions, had vague 

 notions of the unity of type, of nature, of 

 gradations in nature, while the core of his 

 views on evolution was the doctrine of an 

 ' internal perfecting tendency,' which crops 

 out in modern science in the writings of 

 Owen, and even Koelliker, as well as 

 others, including Weismann. 



Passing to the evolutionists of the present 

 century, Oken's place is, it seems to us, 

 properly assigned ; due credit is given to 

 Buffon, who saw the force of isolation, and 

 fall credit to Erasmus Darwin, though suifi- 

 cient stress is perhaps not laid on the fact 

 that he was not a working zoologist and 

 had no followers. Osborn efiectually dis- 

 poses of the strong suspicion of Dr. Krause 

 that Lamarck was familiar with the ' Zo- 

 onomia,' and made use of it in the develop- 

 ment of his theory. He clearljr brings out 

 the fact, as stated by Martins, that Laplace 

 supported Lamarck in the docti-ine of the 

 inheritance of acquired habits, as applied 

 to the origin of the mental faculties of man, 

 both of these authors anticipating Spencer, 

 the doctrine being an old one, and ex- 

 pressed by De MaLUet. 



The statement of Lamai-ck's views is full 

 and carefully drawn up, and his preemi- 



nence as the founder of modern evolution, 

 though he had no immediate ibllowers, ow- 

 ing to liis Cuvierian environment, clearly 

 stated. This being the case, and in \'iew or 

 the fact that the number of Lamarckian 

 evolutionists is now so great and constantly 

 increasing, we should have wished that he 

 had devoted still more si)ace to one of the 

 greatest naturalists of j)re-Darwinian times, 

 giving more quotations fi'om his works. 



Osborn controverts, and with success, we 

 think. Huxley's dictum that Treviranus 

 should be placed in the same rank as an 

 evolutionist with Lamarck. We certainly 

 do not hear of Treviranians. The state- 

 ment of the views of Owen is fair, and yet 

 we should scarcely use the word ' hostility ' 

 in stating his attitude towards Darwinism^ 

 or natm-al selection. Owen refused to at- 

 tack the Vestiges of Creation when that 

 book appeared, but rather sjTnpathized with 

 the general views of its author. As Osborn 

 states, " Owen was an evolutionist in a 

 limited degi'ce," somewhat in the manner 

 of Buffon, and perhaps a shade more fi-om 

 his wide knowledge of paleontology, but it 

 is to be borne in mind that neither was 

 Koelliker nor were others, Darwinians as 

 such, and there are many still who accept 

 the genei-al doctrine of evolution, but do not 

 regard natural selection as an adequate or 

 efl&cient cause, or at least consider it as only 

 one of many factors. 



While mentioning Darwin and Wallace 

 as the leading selectionists no reference is 

 made to the botanist Hooker, who, in his 

 Flora antarctica arrived at the doctrine of 

 transformation independently of Darwin, 

 and became one of his two strongest suppoi't- 

 ers. Also Bates should have been mentioned. 



The book should be widely read, not only 

 by science teachers, by biological students, 

 but we hope that historians, students of 

 social science, and theologians will acquaint 

 themselves with this clear, candid and 

 catholic statement of the origin and early 



