PALEONTOLOGY 115 



facts and their bearing upon the question of evolu- 

 tion. His language is very emphatic in asserting 

 that the known facts of paleontology " negative 

 the common doctrines of progressive modification, 

 which suppose that modification to have taken place 

 by necessary progress from more to less embryonic 

 forms, from more to less generalized types, within 

 the limits of the period represented by the fossil- 

 iferous rocks." " It either shows us no evidence L of 

 such modifications, or demonstrates such modification 

 as has occurred to have been very slight." "And it 

 yields no evidence whatsoever that the earlier mem- 

 bers of any long-continued group were more general- 

 ized in structure than the latter ones." 



The above opinion is reaffirmed with regard to -the 

 Invertebrata and the lower Vertebrata, but is some- 

 what modified" as to the higher Vertebrata. 



The long endurance of species, the persistence of 

 types, the absence of generalized structures from 

 which groups could have branched, are all opposed 

 to the theory of evolution. If, throughout all time 

 since the Primordial, invertebrates have made little 

 or no progress, how was it possible for the Primor- 

 dial types to be evolved from some extremely simple 

 form of life? Why should the various classes of the 

 sub-kingdoms of invertebrates which had marched 

 steadily upward by evolution till they reached the 

 various complex structures of the Primordial, at that 

 point suddenly become incapable of making further 

 progress, so that they have remained comparatively 

 unchanged? 



If Labyrinthodonts, "a comparatively highly organ- 

 ized type," could persist through the Carboniferous, 

 Permian and Triassic, with no considerable change; 

 if "Permian lizards show no signs of inferiority to 

 those of the present day;" if Devonian Ganoids were 



