270 Review of Saporta’s Work ’ 
Art, XX XIII.—WNotice of Gaston de Saporta’s Work: The Plants” 
of the World b-fore the Advent of Man; by Leo LesquEREuX. — 
Count Saporta’s new work entitled “ Le Monde des Plantes — 
avant l’apparition de l’Homme,” is one of importance, not only — 
for phyto-paleontologists and geologists, but for all who are in- — 
terested in the history of our planet, in its physical laws, its — 
gradual march of development, and its different phases until it — 
became a fit habitation for the human race. 
The first part of the book considers the birth or origin of | 
life and the successive and progressive changes which have — 
modified its forms. The phenomena relating to the existence — 
of living creatures are examined in their applications to organ- 
isms from the lowest to the highest in degree of development. 
The second chapter reviews the theory of evolution. e% 
author calls it transformism. On this subject he rightly re- — 
marks, that the theory of evolution does not date from this — 
century; that its origin and history are already old; that the 
system has been under the critical examination of great minds, — 
who have rightly disparaged some of its extreme tendencies. — 
I quote, in passing, some of the statements of the distinguished — 
author, though they may appear disconnected, in order to show ~ 
his mode of reasoning on the subject. 3 
‘Geology admits great divisions or distinct epochs, and suc- — 
cessive formations. But when it comes to the determination — 
of the precise limits of each, to the understanding of the num- — 
ber, the value, or the extent of the stages or subdivisions, the 
| 
difficulties become inextricable; for generally between two — 
epochs, there appear strata of mixed characters which forcibly 
excludes all idea of a marked separation between them.” 
ith reference to the remains of plants, he says: ‘‘ When 
the details of structure and of geographical distribution, which 
are recognized in a plant of our time, are in exact analogy with 
what is known of one or more fossil species of the same genus, 
it is legitimate to disregard some variations of detail, and to 
consider the more recent of the two species as a direct continua- 
tion of the other. To do otherwise would be to put aside all 
resources obtained from analogy and induction, or the method 
itself. Now accepting these premises we may say that there 1s 
no tree or shrub in Europe, in North America and in the Canary — 
Islands, which is not found fossil under a specific form more or 
less intimately allied to one of ourtime. Nearly alwaysa very _ 
ancient type 1s now represented in its decline, while the more 
recent appearance of a plant in geological time generally marks _ 
its wider extension now.” ; 
In the third chapter we have an exposition of the ancient — 
