224 The American Naturalist. [March, 
taken place, and it has not been as great on the islands as on the 
adjoining continent. There remains at least one fact to be de- 
termined, and for its acceptance additional research is certainly 
necessary. The flora of the Santa Barbara Islands is said to 
differ essentially from that which at present exists on the neigh- 
boring main-land of California. What is the relation of the 
present flora of California to that of the Santa Barbara Islands, 
and what was the flora of the main-land, especially in the Pliocene 
Age? Has there been an intercolonization of islands and conti- 
nents since that glacial period? These are questions to be 
answered, but the most important one of all is, “ Are any of the 
plants of the islands peculiar to them?” The above paper ac- 
cepts the observations of others that they are. It seeks to point 
out a cause more potent than any yet suggested, to account for 
peculiarities of this insular flora if such peculiarities exist. 


THE TEETH AS EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. 
W. C. CAHALL. 
a the August number of Lippincott’s Magazine appeared a 
paper by W. G. A. Bonwill, entitled “ Why I Deny Evolu- 
tion.” The argument is based upon the structure of the teeth 
and their relation to the human jaw. 
It would be as incomplete to confine your argument in support 
of the law of gravitation to a single phenomenon, e. g., shooting 
stars, as to rest your plea for evolution upon the human jaw. It 
is manifestly unjust to the proper appreciation of a great doctrine 
like Evolution to deliberately deny oneself the great wealth of 
evidence furnished by Geology, Embryology, Rudimentary Or- 
gans, and the Comparative Anatomy of the several organs of the 
animal economy ; yet it would be equally unfair to Dr. Bonwill to 
meet his argument upon any other ground than that upon which 
his argument is based, the human jaw. 


A 
9 
y 
; 
4 


