lxxvi PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. [May I9O3, 



the biologist for the interpretation and classification of his fossils ; 

 and when we have respect to the rarity and to the fragmentary 

 condition of many of these forms, we cannot sufficiently express 

 our gratitude to Biology for the aid which she has afforded us. 



But there is no need to claim that Geology has repaid the debt. 

 It will be enough if I quote here two short receipts handed in on 

 our behalf, one by the most distinguished biologist of the latter 

 half of the century just closed, and another by the present occupant 

 of his chair. In the words of Huxley, ' the doctrine of evolution 

 in Biology is a necessary result of the logical application of the 

 principles of the geological doctrine of uniformitarianism to the 

 phenomena of life ; Darwin is the natural successor of Hutton and 

 Lyell, and the " Origin of Species " the logical sequence of the 

 "Principles of Geology".' These words were written by him 

 about twenty years since, and his successor, in reviewing from a 

 morphological standpoint a few months ago the work of zoologists 

 accomplished during these twenty years, speaks as follows : — 

 'The progress through which we have passed has produced 

 revolutionary results ; our knowledge of facts has become materially 

 enhanced, and our classifications have been to a large extent 

 replaced in clearer and more comprehensive schemes ; and we are 

 enabled to-day to deduce with an accuracy proportionate to our 

 increased knowledge of fact the nature of the interrelationships of 

 the living beings, which with ourselves inhabit the earth. . . . Satis- 

 factory as is the result, it must be clearly borne in mind that its 

 realization could not have come about but for a knowledge of the 

 animals of the past.' 



It is at the present day the habit of some to hint that Palaeon- 

 tology, as geologists understand it, is a mere branch of Biology, just 

 as it was the fashion half a century ago to look upon it as a branch 

 of Geology. But the proper view, I take it, is to regard it as the 

 common possession of both these sciences. Here, as in so many 

 contests of opinion, the truth lies in the middle. It is undeniable 

 that all the organic remains discovered by the geologist were in 

 their day members of the great biological chain of life, and have 

 therefore their individual places and relationships in the scheme 

 of biological classification ; and that as a consequence the study of 

 their structure and their relationships falls within the province 

 of Biology. But it is equally undeniable that each of these creatures 

 had an existence during a definite range of geological time, and 

 that its fossilized remains occur at a certain horizon in the 



