1950 Classification. 



of some higher laws, from which we may deduce rules for our guid- 

 ance in the selection of the characters on which our system should be 

 founded. 



On the survey of Nature's works, man has throughout been struck 

 with the wondrous and beautiful series of contrivances and adapta- 

 tions of means to the ends destined to be brought about ; and with 

 reference to organized bodies, not only in the structure and allocation 

 of the parts of which they consist, but in the differences which the 

 species present, each being iii every respect so admirably fitted for 

 the situation in which it is placed, and the offices it is intended to 

 perform : this of itself explains, to a considerable extent, the varia- 

 tions which Nature's forms present, but on a more extended exami- 

 nation it is perceived that there exist in similar places, and performing 

 similar functions, creatures which of course resemble each other in 

 their adaptations to that station and those habits, but yet in their ge- 

 neral organization differ most remarkably, some of them perhaps re- 

 sembling others whose places and functions are of a totally different 

 nature ; and on searching further still, we see that Nature has, as it 

 were (though in no way to the detriment of their perfection), limited 

 herself in her contrivances, exhibiting that unity of plan before alluded 

 to, by adopting certain original types or models, modifying their de- 

 tails in various ways to meet the ends required : it is upon this latter 

 law that natural affinities must depend, since, were every species con- 

 structed upon a plan peculiar to itself, solely with regard to fitness for 

 its place, we should look in vain for those general resemblances on 

 which we found our more comprehensive groups. In a species, of 

 course, every character tells : to identify another individual as being 

 of the same species a perfect resemblance is necessary, allowing only 

 for such differences as age, sex, food, locality and other known causes, 

 may have occasioned ; but in grouping species together, where we 

 consider both differences and resemblances, it is obvious that our 

 groups, to be those of Nature, must be founded on the type by which 

 their organization is determined. And it will be seen, that in all 

 classifications which have been to any extent adopted, the higher di- 

 visions have for the most part been formed upon this principle, but it 

 is on descending into the details of the systems, that amidst the mul- 

 tiplicity of characters, especially as those purely adaptive are usually 

 the most conspicuous, the natural affinities have failed to be per- 

 ceived. 



The word u type " is here used in a sense rather different from that 

 in which it has very frequently been applied, and in which perhaps to 



