344 
The Scope and Provinces of Zoology. [June, 
tebrated Animals” under this section the topic of abiogenesis 
is discussed, three causes of variation specified, and phyto- 
geny is defined. In “ The Crayfish” under this heading, 
the creation and abiogenesis (of crayfishes) are discussed, or 
rather dismissed ; also diffusion, changes in physical geo- 
graphy, distributional difficulties, fossil Astacomorpha, and 
the genealogy of crayfishes. In the article “ Biology” in 
the “ Encyclopaedia Brittanica,” also in the “ Anatomy of 
Invertebrated Animals (p. 35), reference is made to “ the 
attempt to found this branch of science made in the “ Origin 
of Species.” Many people will suppose that any further 
critical comment upon a word boasting so celebrated a 
patronage must be impertinent. Nevertheless, to test 
whether or no Professor Huxley is or is not exaggerating 
the scope of oetiology, as indicated in the “ Origin of Spe- 
cies,” cannot be deemed superfluous. The account which 
Mr. Darwin gave of the origin of species reminds one of that 
given by Moses, the chief difference lying in this : that while 
in the writings of the latter on creation we have an abrupt 
and discernible transition from the Elohistic to the Jeovistic 
document*, no such harmonious leap is manifest in the 
“ Origin of Species.” Mr. Darwin detected this, and accord- 
ingly declared that “this whole volume is one long argu- 
ment.” Professor Huxley described the “ Origin of Species” 
as “ a mass of fadts crushed and pounded into shape, rather 
than held together by the ordinary medium of an obvious 
logical bond. ”But Professor Huxley adds, “ Due attention 
will, without doubt, discover this bond, but it is often hard 
to find” (“Lay Sermons,” p. 257). The “Origin of Spe- 
cies” is an oetiology indeed. The sub-divisions of that 
department are blended in the most inextricable confusion, 
and with equal discriminations and modesty the doctrines 
of “ descent with modification” and of “ natural selection” 
are labelled “my” theory and “our” theory (pp. 291, 308, 
310, 312, 344, 351, 359, 362, 375, 379). _ At other times we 
hear, with more propriety and equal indiscrimination, of 
“the” theory and “this” theory (pp. 265, 279, 286, 289,313, 
409, 429). Here choice is offered between the theories of 
creation and of natural selection ( vide esp., p. 383) ; there 
between creation and descent. Criticism on the “ Origin of 
Species,” that is to say the body of the work, must be re- 
garded as fundamentally distinct from complaints about the 
title. The “ Origin of Species” is a legitimate term com- 
* Genesis : Its Authorship and Authenticity. By Charles Bradlaugh. 
Part I. Third Edition. International Library of Science and Freethought 
(vol. iv.), 1882. Vide pp. 9-1 1 ; 93-95 ; 323-328. 
