748 Analyses of Books. [December, 
3rd. Many men believe that our perceptions of moral good and 
evil have been gradually developed on utilitarian principles. Nor 
can we shut our eyes to the facft that multitudes of intelligent 
men consider the belief in superior beings and in an after-life a 
mere delusion. 
But whilst thus rejecting the author’s distinctions between 
man and the lower animals as utterly worthless, we must further 
express our opinion that the subject is here wholly beside the 
question. The unity or diversity of mankind is unaffected by 
such considerations as whether man forms a distinct kingdom, a 
distinct class, or merely a separate family or perhaps genus. 
What may have been the motive of M. de Quatrefages in begin- 
ning his task in the manner he has selected we have no right to 
pronounce. 
In several of the following chapters the author is concerned 
with the reality and permanence of species, and with anti- 
Darwinism, or rather with anti-Evolutionist polemics. He here 
brings forward little, if anything, which has not been repeatedly 
advanced elsewhere, and has been found wanting. His charac- 
teristic defects here are a disposition to overlook or undervalue 
the palaeontological and embryological evidence, and to cling to 
the notion of “ filiation.” In other words the author, if we do 
not misunderstand him, contends that because in the few centu- 
ries over which our observations extend, and in the few cases 
which have been studied with sufficient closeness and accuracy, 
we have seen plants and animals vary merely within certain limits, 
therefore species are permanent. This is the “ Egyptian ’’’argu- 
ment, first raised by the members of the French scientific expe- 
dition to Egypt under the first Napoleon. It has been well 
remarked that this argument proves too much ! 
We cannot help here recording our protest against the spirit of 
many passages of the present work. He forgets that prejudices 
may be more easily Cuvierian than Darwinian. He speaks of 
men carried away by their enthusiasm, throwing overboard the 
results of their illustrious predecessors. Is he not aware that 
Darwin has been and still is one of the most patient and perse- 
vering observers and experimentators the world has ever wit- 
nessed ? Are not his disciples, of whatsoever nationality, 
zealously following his example ? Does not the balance of fadfs 
observed point so uniformly against the fixity and reality of spe- 
cies that the day for useful discussion is well-nigh over ? In 
short, as an eminent German naturalist has well said, we no 
longer enquire whether transformation has taken place, but how 
it has been effected. 
Anent the distribution of the human species M. de Quatrefages 
speaks of the centres of creation, or rather of appearance, “ a 
dodtrine entirely French in origin, having been formulated by 
Desmoulins and developed by M. Edwards.” He might have 
added, “ and entirelyoutof harmony with fadfs asnowascertained.” 
