AXNTVERSAEY ADDRESS. U 



oldest Foraminifera either simpler, more embryonic, or less differen- 

 tiated than the existing forms. 



The CceJenterata. — The Tabulate Corals have existed from tlio 

 Silurian epoch to the present day, but I am not aware that the 

 ancient Heliolites possesses a single mark of a more embryonic or less 

 differentiated character, or less liigh organization, than the existing 

 Helio^ora. As for the Aporose Corals, in what respect is the Silurian 

 Palceoci/cJus less highly organized or more embryonic than the modern 

 FuiUjia, or the Liassic Aporosa than the existing members of the 

 same families ? 



The MoUusca. — In what sense is the living WaWieimia less 

 embryonic, or more specialized, than the palaeozoic Sjnrifer ; or the 

 existing RliynclionelJce, Cranice, Discince, Lingulce, than the Silurian 

 species of the same genera ? In what sense can Loligo or S^irula 

 be said to be more specialized or less embryonic than Belemnites ; 

 the modern species of Lamellibranch and Gasteropod genera than 

 the Siliuian species of the same genera ? 



The Anmdosa. — The Carboniferous Insecta and Arachnida are 

 neither less specialized nor more embryonic than those that now live, 

 nor are the Liassic CiiTipedia and Macrura ; while several of the 

 Brachyiu'a which appear in the Chalk belong to existing genera, and 

 none exhibit either an intermediate or an embryonic character. 



The Vertehrata. — Among fishes I have referred to the Coelacanthini 

 (compiising the genera CoslacantJms, IIoIoj)7iagtis, Unclina, and Ma- 

 cropoma) as affording an example of a persistent type ; and it is most 

 remarkable to note the smallness of the differences between any of 

 these fishes (affecting at most the proportions of the body and fins, 

 and the character and sculpture of the scales), notwithstanding 

 their enormous ran^e in time. In all the essentials of its 



ery 



peculiar structure, the Macropoma of the Chalk is identical with the 

 CcelacantJms of the Coal. Look at the genus Lepidotiis, again, per- 

 sisting without a modification of importance from the Lias to the 

 Eocene formation, inclusive. 



Or among the Teleostei — in what respect is the Beryx of the Chalk 

 more embryonic or less differentiated than the Beryx lineatus of 

 King George's Sound ? 



Or to tui'n to the higher Vertehrata — in what sense are the Liassic 

 Chelonia inferior to those which now exist? How are the Cretaceous 

 Ichthyosauiia, Plcsiosauria, or Pterosauria less embiyonic or more 

 differentiated species than those of the Lias ? 



Or lastly, in what circumstance is the Phascolotherium more em- 

 brj-onic, or of a more generalized type, than the modern Opossum ; or 

 a LopModon, or a Pcdceotherium, than a modern Tapirus or Hyrax ? 



These examples might be almost indefinitely multipUcd, but surely 

 they are sufficient to prove that the only safe and unquestionable 

 testimony we can procure — positive evidence — fails to demonstrate 

 any sort of progressive modification towards a less cmbrj^onic or less 

 generalized type in a great man}^ groups of animals of long-continued 

 geological existence. In these groups tlicre is abundant evidence of 

 variation — none of what is ordinarily understood as progression ; and, 



