42 Analyses of Books. [January, 
the author, whilst distinctly adopting the doCtrine of organic de- 
velopment as opposed to that of individual and mechanical 
creation, no less distinctly repudiates “ natural selection” as the 
cause to which the origin of species is due. Although not pre- 
pared to tndorse this absolute rejection of the principle which in 
the hands of Mr. Darwin and Mr. Wallace has led or seemed to 
lead to such splendid results, we did not seek to conceal our ap- 
probation of no small part of Mr. Butler’s views. Perhaps we 
might have spoken somewhat more strongly, but, never having 
been able to relish natural selection, which to us seemed like a 
glorification, if not a deification of the most painful faCt in the 
universe, we feared to give way to a bias in the author’s favour. 
It seems to us that natural selection, or, in other words, the 
struggle for existence, is more likely to reduce than to increase 
the number of species. Mr. Wallace expressly admits * that, 
“ new species can only be formed when and where there is room 
fcr them.” Hence the less severe the struggle for existence, and 
the less natural selection is brought into play, the more likely are 
new species to be called into existence. 
In the same work Mr. Wallace further remarks : — “ The most 
effective agent in the extinction of species is the pressure of 
other species, whether as enemies or simply as competitors.'}' 
In a very similar manner, Dr. H. Behr, speaking of the native 
vegetation of California, says : — “Its very variation is a proof of 
a certain want of vitality, for any more vigorous organisation 
by superseding the weaker ones would have produced originally 
the monotony developed at present by the immigration of foreign 
plants.” Here again the struggle for existence is held up, not 
as a multiplier, but as a reducer of the number of species. If 
such is its fundion in our time we can scarcely believe that it 
can ever have played the opposite part and been so largely in- 
strumental in producing the present multitude of organic forms 
from a few original types. We often forget that out of the 
almost infinite array of animal and vegetable species the ma- 
jority are rare. Now if it be true, as most naturalists admit, that 
a rare species is one that is verging towards extinction, what 
are we to infer ? 
Mr. Butler speaks of himself as “ one of a small body of mal- 
contents.” But though few, perhaps, will join him in his total 
denial of the claims of natural selection to rank as an agent in 
the formation of species, those who assign it the sole place are 
rarer still. It has become almost a truism to say that selection 
pre-supposes variation ; whence, then, springs the variation ? 
There is a serious difficulty in the way of Mr. Butler’s hypo- 
thesis, or rather in that of the elder Darwin, and of Buffon, 
which he has revived. It is found that a pair of young birds, 
* Highland Life, p. 55. 
t Enemies or competitors : is not this a distinction without a difference ? 
