UNITY OF PLAN IN NATURE 103 



arrangement acquires importance from its frequency, and is referable to a law in anatomy and physiology based 

 upon reduplication and repetition. Nature, like history, repeats itself, and the same forms and conditions reappear 

 under various guises and sometimes in the most unlooked-for quarters — hence the ubiquitous and perplexing vestiges 

 or remnants. 



The community of structure observable in Venus's flower-basket and the ventricles of the heart affords another 

 example of repetition in things widely separated. Nor does the matter rest here. The radiating, branching, con- 

 centric and spiral arrangements ; the longitudinal and transverse cleavage ; the distribution of matter in prismatic 

 columns, &c. ; are found in inorganic and organic substances alike. The arrangements in question obtain in plants 

 and animals, and also in the matter from which they are originally formed. This bespeaks a common origin, and 

 the operation of similar laws in the inorganic and organic kingdoms. It testifies to the oneness of the universe as 

 regards its dead or '■ brut " matter, and its living or vitalised matter. 



§21. Unity of Plan in Nature as regards Form and Colour: so-called Mimicry. 



It follows that there is, within Umits, a unity of plan as between the productions of the inorganic and organic 

 kingdoms. The unity of plan extends not only to the objects found in the inorganic and organic kingdoms but also 

 to the colours of the objects forming these kingdoms ; and many, if not all, of the colours of plants and animals 

 attributed to mimicry may, it appears to me, be referred to the unity of plan indicated. The prevalence of form- 

 types and colour-types in nature all points to harmony and design. 



Certainly the infinite variety of tints, and the gorgeous display of colour witnessed in the heavens, in flowers, 

 feathers, hairs, sheUs, minerals, &c., cannot be accounted for by any theory of mimicry or imitation. Harmony 

 of form and colour in the inorganic and organic kingdoms is a proof of unity and unity only. The harmony in 

 question can scarcely be regarded as capricious or accidental, or even as the result of effort on the part of the things 

 constituting the harmony. 



Animals have been said to imitate their surroimdings in order to avoid detection and so save themselves from 

 their enemies. The leaf-insect is stated to assume the characteristics of a leaf, and the stick-insect of dead branches. 

 This reasoning could not apply to the brain-coral, and the transverse section of the tooth of the labyrinthodon, 

 both of which are hteral transcripts of the convolutions of the human brain. Neither could it account for Venus's 

 flower-basket structurally resembhng the ventricles of the heart, or the spicules of sponges resembling certain crystals, 

 or crystals and plants resembling each other. Still less could it explain how corals, which are the skeletons of 

 living things, resemble basaltic rock formations, and how the latter resemble the prisms found in the enamel of 

 teeth, in the fasciculi of voluntary muscles, in the honeycomb, and other cell structures. 



AU these resemblances are to be referred to a law of development, and a general plan, which applies both to the 

 inorganic and organic kingdoms. Neither plants nor animals have the power of imitating or growing like anything 

 but themselves. Such power implies design and creative agency outside both. The living thing cannot fashion 

 itself or assume fantastic shapes and colours as apart from a Creator and a general scheme of form and colour. The 

 power of mimicry for protective purposes is attributed to a comparatively few plants and animals. What is to be 

 said regarding the majority of plants and animals not so protected ? The question naturally arises, Why shotdd 

 the few enjoy powers and privileges not possessed by the many ? If the colour and spots of certain flat fishes 

 resemble the sand and gravel on which they rest, and the plumage of the grouse and ptarmigan resemble the heather 

 and the snow, it is because there is a scheme of colour in creation as there is a scheme of form. The presence of 

 the most exquisite colours in the sides, and in minerals buried deep in the earth, as well as in plants and animals 

 and their tissues, attests the accuracy of this observation. If the chameleon changes colour in a living, natural 

 condition, the dolphin does the same when dying. Mimicry affords no explanation. Moreover, there are myriads 

 of plants and animals with bright colours, which, while they are effective and appropriate objects in the landscape, 

 and contribute to the general harmony, would mark them only as objects to be destroyed by their natural enemies 

 The explanation lies deeper than mere mimicry. The power to assume what are virtually new shapes and colours, as 

 explained, does not inhere in plants and animals, but is conferred on them by the Creator. The same is to be 

 said of developing plants and animals. Every differentiation, every change and modification, of form and coloiir, 

 is predetermined. Like can only beget Uke, The leopard cannot change its spots, neither can the zebra change 

 its stripes. 



