304 
THE GEOLOGIST. 
to tlie liorse as an " autotlieogen." Cuvier says, " If species have gradu- 
ally changed, traces of these gradual modificatious would be discovered ; 
and between the PalcEothenum and the recent species some intermediate 
forms would be seen ; a fact yet undemonstrated. Why have not the 
bowels of the earth preserved the monuments of so curious a genealogy ? " 
etc. etc. (Cuvier, ' Discours Preliminaire sur les Kevolutions de la Surface 
du Globe,' 6th edition, 8vo, Paris, 1830, p. 122.) Here the absence of 
intermediate organisms, previous to the discovery of Paloploiheriiim, 
Ancliitherium, and Hipparion, is made the groundwork on which to base 
a theory of distinct specific origin, or " autotheogeny." That, " on psycho- 
logical grounds alone, Man must be regarded as isolated from all other 
organisms " may be conceded. As psychological grounds hov\ ever are 
unsafe bases for a zoological classification, and as the extent of man's 
isolation is the problem which biologists are attempting to decipher, what- 
ever position we may assign to man, whether with Owen in a distinct sub- 
class Archenceplicda or with Huxley in a family Anthropini of the order 
Primates, we must at least admit that the anatomical characters of man 
are not more unlike those of the higher Gyrencephala than the lower 
Gyrencephala are unlike the Lissencephala or Lyencepliala, i.e. that 
man is not more unlike the gorilla than the whale is like the rat or the 
opossum. I therefore would be slow to recognize that Man is an 
autotheogenous species. 
I coincide with Professor King's remarks, that " natural selection only 
holds the rank of a subordinate or ancillary agent," but I am far from 
identifying the " other and higher principles involved " with the doctrine 
of direct creation of animals through a fiat from a Primary Cause, even 
though such a fiat miglit operate through "a principle inherent in animated 
nature," Such phenon)ena as unity of plan, parthenogenesis, and succes- 
sive development are far more probably accounted for on secondary laws 
alone. " He must be a half-hearted philosopher \a ho, having watched the 
gigantic strides of the biological sciences during the past twenty years, 
doubts that science wiU sooner or later make this further step, so as to 
become possessed of the law of evolution of organic forms — of the 
unvarying order of that great chain of causes and efiects of which all 
organic forms, ancient and moderii, are the links." * 
In Professor King's ethnological remarks, no mention is made of the 
probabilities of a derivative origin of the lower races of man, as indicated 
by their physiological affinities to the higher apes. I commend the 
following extract from Dr. Biichner's 'Kraft und Stoff" (8vo, Prankf. p. 
75, 1858) to Professor King's consideration: — 
"An unbroken series of the most varied and multifarious transitions 
and analogies unites the whole animal kingdom together, from its lowest 
to its highest unit. Even man, who in his spiritual pride thinks himself 
raised high above the whole animal world, is far removed from being 
an exception to this law. The Ethiopic race unites him by a crowd of the 
most striking analogies with the animal kingdom in a very unmistakable 
way. The long arms, the form of the foot, the fleshless calf, the long 
slender hands, the general lankness, the but slightly protuberant nose, the 
projecting teeth, the low retreating forehead, the narrow and posteriorly 
protuberant head, the short neck, the contracted pelvis, the pendulous 
belly, the want of beard, the colour of the skin, the disgusting odour, the 
uncleanliness, the making of grimaces whilst spcakhig, the clear shrill tone 
of voice, and the ape-like character of the whole being, are just so many 
characteristic signs, which in all the corporeal forms and relations of the 
* Huxley, Address to the Geological Society, Feb. 21, 1862, p. 23. 
