Results of Geology. 69 



lopment, as should cause them in successive ages to fill up the 

 whole space with an infinite variety of organic beings. The great 

 ■discovery of Von Baer, of the existence of lower forms in the em- 

 bryo-state of higher animals, has been supposed by speculative 

 philosophers to favour the theory of development ; but it does no 

 more than prove that, whilst the animal is obliged to live under 

 conditions different from those of his complete organization, no 

 new form of organization is adopted, but simply one of those be- 

 longing to animals who ordinarily live under such conditions ; 

 and, though the perfect animal has passed through such changes, 

 the successive developments exhibited during the embryonic life 

 of an animal, or during the period of a few weeks or months, or 

 perhaps a year, can neither be taken as a proof of a separate in- 

 dividual existence, under either of the embryonic types, nor repre- 

 sent the changes which the same animal, as a species, may have 

 really passed through in countless ages : on the contrary, it is 

 more reasonable to suppose that this involved structure was adopt- 

 ed at the first creation of each of these species, and indicates only 

 the simplicity and harmony of natural laws. If, however, the 

 organic creation was effected as one great whole, and gradually 

 diminished by the dropping-out of many of its links, either by 

 generic or by specific death, how can we account for the total ab- 

 sence in the deposits of early times of any traces of the now living 

 animals which were then co-existent with those of whom such 

 abundant records have been preserved ? To me it seems impos- 

 sible to adopt such a theory without combining with it that of 

 development. For not only must certain forms of organization 

 have disappeared, but others must have so varied as no longer to 

 be recognized as identical with those which have been revealed to 

 us in the stony tablet of the earth. 



I have already, more than once, alluded to the theory of colo- 

 nies, proposed by M. Barrande, and I cannot deny myself the 

 pleasure of once more recurring to it, and pointing out its great 

 importance. Whilst then regretting, more than condemning, that 

 ill-judged zeal, which, seeking to restrict the inquiries of man, by 

 insisting that he shall take all his opinions of creation from that 

 one book given unto man for a totally different object, I cannot 

 but observe that the real history of the creation given in the Bible 

 affords a wholesome caution to all those who endeavour to explain 

 every act of the Creator as if He had been a man. Except as re- 

 gards man, creation is not described as a work of manufacturing 



