EEYIEWS* 
189 
natural selection is incompetent to account for the incipient stages of useful 
structures. That it does not harmonise with the co-existence of closely 
similar structures of diverse origin. That there are grounds for thinking that 
specific differences may he developed suddenly instead of gradually. That the 
opinion that species have definite though very different limits to their 
variability is still tenable. That certain fossil transitional forms are absent 
which might have been expected to be present. That some facts of geo- 
graphical distribution supplement other difficulties. That the objections 
drawn from the physiological difference between “ species ” and u races ” still 
exists unrefuted. That there are many remarkable phenomena in organic 
forms upon which natural selection throws no light whatever, but the ex- 
planation of which, if they could be attained, might throw light upon specific 
origination. 
It is, as we have said, out of the question our endeavouring to give place to 
quotations from the volume ; our space does not permit it. We may observe, 
however, that Mr. Mivart, as we have already stated, proves, we think, decidedly 
that specific differences may be developed suddenly, and in many, if not all, 
cases are so developed. Admitting this, we can go no further. He has 
raised difficulties ; he has produced numberless cases which are against the 
doctrine laid down by Mr. Darwin, but he has not given any in support of 
Mr. Darwin’s views, and these we know to be infinite in number. He quotes 
Sir W. Thomson in support of the earth’s age, but many persons are opposed 
to these views, which are at the best extremely hypothetical. Taking 
a difficult line of argument — and there are none more so than Mr. Darwin's 
— he asks why the geological record is not more popular ; forgetting, as it 
seems to us, that the geologic facts must always be of the most rudimentary 
character, seeing that whole rock-formations may have been formed and 
washed away again, and indeed have been so. Mr. Mivart is, it seems to 
us, a little too much in favour of his own theory, and has not given Mr. 
Darwin’s any of the immense arguments in its favour. This, however, has 
been done unwittingly, for all through the volume there is the best of good 
feeling shown. Indeed, it is the only book we have ever seen where a 
purely controversial question is treated so fully and so fairly, and our best 
xhanks are due to the author on this account. We cannot admit all that 
he desires to prove, but it appears to us that the book is worthy of a high 
rank from its having proved one point, and that a most important one. It 
is a volume which deserves to be read by every naturalist, and one which 
will continue to live long after its author has ceased to exist. 
The Student's Guide to the Practice of Measuring and Valuing Artificers' 
Works, by E. W. Tarn, M. A., Architect. New edition. London: Lock- 
wood, 1871. — This is a valuable work for all who desire a standard gpidei 
to the methods employed by surveyors in their measurement of builders’ 
works. The several rules and plans it contains appear good and clear. 
Extending over more than 300 pages, it necessarily deals largely with the 
subject, and is so copiously illustrated that we think the student need have 
little difficulty in mastering it. We wish our space would permit us a 
longer notice, for the book really deserves it. 
