INTRODUCTION. 83 



which takes place between closely proximate species, as strong man- 

 kind and the common domestic animals essential to liis happiness. 



According to Mr. Eyton, (Proceedings of Zoo], Soc., London, Feb. 

 1837,) the offspring of the Chinese hog and the common European 

 hojj are prolific inter se; now these animals differ from the wild 

 boar, and the French hog, in the Dumber of the vertebra as follows: 

 60, 55, 15, and 53. To say that these are all domestic varieties of 

 one sp tlowing too much to the semi-domestication of these 



animals. It is much less difficult to believe with Hamilton Smith (on 

 Canidas) that this is "a case of providential arrangemenl for b given 

 purpose, ami that there are time, if not four, original species (includ- 

 ing the African) with powers to commix." (p. 94.) 



The exit ot of the argument thai can be drawn from the phenomena 

 of hybridity as regards man, is (as Temminck has remarked of /■ink) 

 " that the occurrence of the prolific offspring between the different 

 races shows that there is a near affinity between the species." 



Wl shall conclude this abstract by a few remarks in favor of the 

 diversity of the human races, drawn from various sources of modern 

 date, expressing our own opinion from a careful study of the phenom- 

 ena, and from personal observation. 



Those who maintain the one-pair theory deny the permanent of 



and place gTl at stress upon the capacity for variation in 

 animals, and therefore in man; and, when difficulties arise which 

 cannot be explained by the usual causes, they invoke the aid of 

 variation and accidental generation. 



Allowing for the m nt thai civilization in man and domestica- 

 tion in animals are analogous conditions, (which is of vital impor- 

 tance to their theory,) lei us Bee whal can be established in regard 

 to changes produced by climate and externa] influences. 



The capacity lor variation is certainly great in our domestic ani- 

 mal-, submitted as they are to various unnatural circumstances. 



The most commonly used argument in this connection is fur- 

 nished by the varieties of the dog-, which are considered as belonging 

 to one species. To say nothing, however, of the " petitio principii " 

 here, in assuming the point wished to be proved, many eminent nat- 

 uralists believe that there are several species of dojrs. The objec- 

 tion of F. Cuvicr that, " if we begin to make species, we cannot 

 stop short at live or six, but must go on indefinitely," is of no 

 weight ; the most it can do is to show us the exceedingly vajjue 

 meaning of the word species, and that we have not yet arrived at 



