REMARKS ON THE FIGURES OF PLATE XXVII. 3 
series, then we may safely assert that neither the absolute 
condition of species, nor the absolute character of uni- 
formity can be defined by either one view or the other 
exclusively contemplated, even though the weight of the 
name Cuvier, turns the balance preponderating at one 
time to specific variety, and the transcendental philosophy 
which encireles the name Geoffroy, turns it at other times 
gravitating to the side of unity. 
For, setting aside the word species as well as the word 
unity, and viewing the ens in presence of the law which 
creates it, we attach ourselves to the comparison of fig. A 
with fig. B, whereupon we find that owing to the simple 
law of subtracting from plus quantity, the one form may 
be rendered as various to the other, or even the one form 
as various to itself by the like operation, as that variety 
which we find characterising the skeleton axis of a hippo- 
potamus, a cachalot, a vampyre, an ornithorhynchus, a 
It is not 
in human ingenuity either to establish their absolute 
vulture, an alligator, a frog, or a salamander. 
uniformity, or to demonstrate the hiatus of absolute 
specific difformity between the things of serial graduation, 
for whereas the law of formation manifests itself in simply 
degrading from the greater and thereby establishing the 
creation of the lesser, so must it be evident that the lesser 
the degree of subtraction performed upon the figure of the 
greater or whole, the lesser will be the variety produced, 
and consequently the greater the degree of subtraction, 
the greater will be the degree of proportional variety. If 
from fig. B, (whose archetype, plus thoracic series, we have 
for illustration reimstated and drawn from the atlas to the 
first sacral bone) Nature, in furtherance of design, subtracts 
costal quantity, and thereby creates the design of the 
cervix and loins, such as we find it in fig. A, then fig. A 
differs from fig. B according to the amount of subtracted 
quantity. If, again,.exceeding the degree of natural 
subtraction, we ourselves metamorphose the costal forms 
of all the thoracic quantities of fig. A, leaving only the 
three mid thoracic forms standing, such as those marked 
7ba, 8ba, 9ba, then fig. A will be struck as various to its 
former self of normal condition, as we conceive this 
normal human type to be various to archetype serial plus 
uniformity indicated in fig. B. 
Nature subtracts from plus serial uniformity, and vary- 
ing designs occur according to the varying degrees of sub- 
traction. ‘This isthe simple fact to which our observations 
tend, and we prefer the plain exposure of this fact by an 
open demonstration, than to continue questioning the 
precise import of word or phrase, of species or of unity. 
For as in the presence of the anatomical entity, the name 
or sound is nonentity, so we find that the names of species 
and unity whether applied to characterise the absolute 
difformity or the absolute identity of the things a—d and 
a+6 have never led, and can never lead, to any other 
interpretation than that the one is minus and that the 
other is plus. There cannot be any other absolute 
uniformity, save that of a plus series, and the degradation 
of this is the source of proportional variety. 
And therefore as it appears most true that species 
follows subtraction, while unity mounts by addition, we 
must hence conclude that species occurs as well by the 
subtraction of microscopic infinitesimals, as by any greater 
degree of qnantity ;* and for this reason we abandon the 
pursuit of isolating species as hopeless, and turn our atten- 
tion to the pursuit of unity or the whole quantity, as being 
a limited and definable creation. For if the idea which fig. 
B supplies, serves us with the interpretation that it is a whole 
serial sum, plus in costal quantity at its cervix and loins, 
and that from it such a minus figure as fig. A may be sub- ' 
tracted by the simple omission of seven costal pairs at the 
cervix, and five costal pairs at the loms; so may we con- 
clude that fig. B is plus unity, whereas fig. A is minus 
variety or species. And from this reading we start in 
quest of that figure of serial costo-vertebral uniformity, 
which has an actual existence in Nature, such as we anti- 
cipate it in the plan of fig. B. The whole osseous quantity 
of unity cannot be that series which, like fig. A, possesses 
the minus regional divisions of a cervix and loins, and 
wherein we occasionally meet with a plus “anomalous” 
ierease such as cervical and lumbar ribs. But the whole 
form of serial and continuous uniformity + must be that 
plus sum upon which metamorphosis has not exercised for 
the production of hiatus or minus regions. Hence the minus 
regions of cervix, loins, sacrum, or caudex, cannot exist 
in it as. being the original or prime model. As the minus 
regions of series are formed by vertebral quantities, and 
the plus or thoracic regions by costo-vertebral archetypes, 
so must the prime model or serial uniformity consist from 
origin to termination of its lme in the condition of costo- 
vertebral forms, and this is the standard whereunto all 
minus designs are to be compared. 
*“ Entre le dégré le plus bas et le dégré le plus élevé de la Perfection Corporelle ou Spirituelle, il est wx nombre presqu’ infini de dégrés 
intermédiaires. La suite de ces dégrés compose la chaine universelle. 
Elle unit tous les étres, lie tous les mondes, embrasse toutes les sphéres. 
Un Seul Etre est hors de cette chaine, et c’est celui qui l’a faite.”—Bonnet, Quwvres d’Histoire Naturelle et de Philosophie, Contemplation 
de la Nature, Chap. ix. 
t+ “Continuatio est partium inter se non intermissa conjunctio.”—Seneca, Natur. Queest., lib. ii. 
Bibl. Class. Lat,, Lemaire, vol. 87. 
