9 
Grove, which present an argument in favour of 
gradual succession are the phases of resem- 
blance to inferior orders which the embryo 
passes through in its development, and the re- 
lations shown in what is termed the metamor- 
phosis of plants ; facts difficult to account for 
on the theory of frequent separate creations, 
but almost inevitable on that of gradual 
succession; So, also, the existence of 
of rudimentary and effete organs, which must 
either be referred to a freak of nature or to 
some mode of continuous succession. There 
would be a greater fixity in the organisms 
during periods of little change on the earth’s 
surface than during periods of more rapid 
transition ; for, though rejecting catastrophes 
as the general modus operandi of Nature, the 
President is far from saying that the march of 
physical change has been always perfectly 
uniform. While the evidence daily becomes 
stronger in favour of a derivative hypothesis 
as applied to the succession of organic beings, 
we are far removed from anything like a suffi- 
cient number of facts to show that, at all 
events within the existing geological periods 
capable of being investigated, there has been 
any great progression from a simpler or more 
embryonic to a more complex type. The re- 
cords of life on the globe may have been 
destroyed by the fusion of the rooks, which 
would otherwise have preserved them, or by 
crystallization after hydrothermal action. The 
earlier forms may have existed when this planet 
was in course of formation, or being segregated 
or detached from other worlds or systems. 
We have not evidence enough to speculate on 
the subject, but by time and patience we may 
acquire it. But a small proportion of extinct 
forms is preserved. On the dry land, un- 
washed by rivers and seas, when an animal or 
plant dies it undergoes chemical decompo- 
sition which changes its form ; it is consumed 
by insects, its skeleton is oxydized and 
crumbles into dust. In the deeper parts of 
the ocean?, or of the larger lakes, the few fish 
there are perish and their remains sink to the 
bottom, and are there frequently consumed by 
other marine or lacustrine organisms, or chemi- 
cally decomposed. As a general rule, it is 
only when the remains are silted up by marine, 
fluviatile, or lacustrine sediments that the re- 
mains are preserved. The mass of preserved 
relics would be those of creatures likely to in- 
habit deltas or the margins of seas, lakes, or 
rivers ; and so we find it : the bulk of fossil 
remains consists of amphibia, shellfish form 
the greater part of the geological museum, 
limestone and chalk rocks frequently consisting 
of little else than fossil shells. Plants of reed 
or rush-like character, fish which are capable 
of inhabiting shallow waters, and. saurian 
animals form another large portion of geologi- 
cal remains. Notwithstanding the immense 
number of preserved fossils, there must have 
lived an immeasurably larger number of uu- 
preserved organic beings, so that the chance of 
filling up the missing links, except in occasional 
instances, is very slight. Yet, where circum- 
stances have remained suitable, many closely 
connected species have been preserved— while 
the intermediate types in certain cases are lost, 
in others they exist. The opponents of con- 
tinuity lay all stress on the lost, and none on the 
existing links. Let any one assume that one 
of his ancestors at the time of the Norman 
Conquest was a Moor, another a Celt, and a 
third a Laplander, and that these three were 
preserved while all the others were lost, he 
would never recognise either of them as his 
ancestor — he would only have the one hundred 
millionth of the blood of each of them, and 
as far as they were concerned, there would be 
no perceptible sign of identity of race. Taking 
intermarriages into account, the law of proba- 
bilities would indicate that any two people in 
the same European country, taken at hazard, 
would not have many generations to go 
back before they would come to a 
common ancestor, who probably, could 
they have seen him or her in the life, 
had no traceable resemblance to either 
of them. Thus, two animals of a very different 
form, and of what would be termed very 
different species, might have a common geo- 
logical ancestor, and yet the skill of no 
comparative anatomist could trace the 
descent. The recent discoveries in palaeon- 
tology show us that man existed on this planet 
at an epoch far anterior to that commonly 
assigned to him, and Mr. Grove thinks that 
what we call civilization must have been a 
gradual process. If he appears to lean to the 
view that the successive changes in organic 
beings do not take place by sudden leaps, it is, 
he believes, from no want of impartial feeling ; 
but if the facts are stronger in favour of one 
theory than another, it would be an affectation 
of impartiality to make the balance appear 
equipoised. The prejudices of education, and 
associations with the past, are against the 
derivative hypothesis as against all new views, 
but, while a theory is not to be adopted because 
it is new and plausible, its running counter to 
existing opinions is not a reason for its rejec- 
tion. The fair question is, does the newly pro- 
posed view remove more difficulties, require 
fewer assumptions, and present more consistency 
with observed facts than that which it seeks to 
supersede? if so the philosopher will adopt it, 
and the world will follow the philosopher — 
after many days. It must be borne in mind 
that, even if we are satisfied that organic forms 
have varied indefinitely in time, the ultimata 
cause of these changes is not explained by our 
researches. If it be admitted that we find no 
evidence of amorphous matter suddenly 
changed into complex structure, still, why 
matter should be endowed with the plasticity 
by which it slowly acquires modified structure 
is unexplained, If we assume that natural 
