33 
question in order to allude to the fact that man does introduce 
rudimentary and useless structures in modern art, which, how- 
ever, had their uses, but which are now obsolete, but not with 
such purpose. 
One illustration will suffice. In the days when roads were 
bad, it was necessary to have straps with loops, by which to 
hold on inside the carriages or coaches. When roads became 
good, coaches were still made with them, though their “use” 
had gone. First-class railway carriages, which were originally 
three coaches united, have them still . Again ; boots, before 
vulcanized indiarubber was invented, were usually laced up 
over the instep; when elastic sides were adopted, imitation 
lacing was inserted. Many other instances might be given 
besides these two, which are suggested by Mr. Wallace. 
Now, if the modern coachbuilder or railway-carriage manu- 
facturer were asked why he still made these useless appendages, 
whatever his answer, I am quite sure it would not be in order 
to show that modern carriages are built on the same plan as 
those of the sixteenth century ! If then we argue from the 
rudiments in man’s works to those in creation, this explanation 
usually given is utterly preposterous, and Mr. Lewes may well 
say that it is “ a specimen of pedantic trifling worthy of no 
intellect above the Pongo’s.” (p. 615.) 
Eesides atrophied and rudimentary organs, which, when 
compared with their homologies in full development and 
activity, evince an absence of that perfection which is so in- 
sisted upon by teleologists, the very organs taken to prove 
perfection of design and execution, such as the eye, witness to 
a great want of perfection. 
Now, if it can be shown that so highly elaborate a structure 
as the eye is relatively perfect only, we need not attempt to 
prove it for any other. 
Purposely omitting all diseases to which the eye is subject, 
the first imperfections I will notice are long and short sight. 
Again, eyesight is of great variability of strength. In many 
Cases the weakness (due to degeneration and atrophy, but not 
disease) amounts to a positive defect. Some persons have no 
appreciation of distinct colours, all appearing alike ; or else 
they cannot distinguish between complementary colours, such 
as red and green. In other persons, called “ moon-blind,” 
they cannot see after a certain hour of the day. Again, the 
achromatism is said not to be absolutely perfect, while the 
power of adjustment to strong light is greatly limited ; and in 
many cases sight fails under certain employments, such as type- 
setting, &c., and so on. 
I am not complaining that our eyes are not absolutely 
vol. vit. D 
