II.] Mr. Mivart on Darwinism. ^y 



the argument ; for on the one hand the Darwinian 

 theory nowhere requires an uninterrupted progress, 

 but rather implies a complicated backward and for- 

 ward movement, of which an irregular progress is 

 the differential result. And as to the second point, 

 it is just one of the triumphs of Darwinism, as regards 

 speculative consistency with facts, that it does account 

 for the alteration in the series of effects which occurs 

 as we approach the origin of mankind. For when 

 intelligence has increased pari passu with physical 

 advantages up to a certain point, the variations in 

 intelligence begin to become more valuable than any 

 variations in physical constitution, and consequently 

 become predominantly subject to the operation of 

 natural selection, to the comparative neglect of purely 

 physical variations. A change of this sort, if pro- 

 longed for a sufficient length of time,' would go far to 

 account for the greatness of the mental difference 

 between men and apes, as contrasted with the small- 

 ness of the structural difference. 



That Mr, Mivart should fail to appreciate this 

 point, long since suggested by Mr. Wallace, is perhaps 

 not to be wondered at, since he reduces the inquiry 

 to a mere controversy in which he holds a brief 

 against the Darwinians. What his own views may 

 be as to the origin of man he nowhere explicitly 



