{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_18521/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_18521","id":"gutenberg_18521","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/18521","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Religion/Spirituality","Category: Science - Biology","Category: Science - Earth/Agricultural/Farming","Chambers, Robert, 1802-1871. Vestiges of the natural history of creation","Creation","Creationism","Evolution","Evolution (Biology) -- Religious aspects -- Christianity","Laplace, Pierre Simon, marquis de, 1749-1827"],"text":"Produced by Bryan Ness, Eva Sweeney, Jamie Atiga and the\nOnline Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net\n\n\n\n\n\nAN EXPOSITORY OUTLINE\n\nOF THE\n\n\"VESTIGES OF THE NATURAL HISTORY OF CREATION;\"\n\nWITH A COMPREHENSIVE AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ARGUMENTS BY WHICH THE\nEXTRAORDINARY HYPOTHESES OF THE AUTHOR ARE SUPPORTED AND HAVE BEEN\nIMPUGNED, WITH THEIR BEARING UPON THE RELIGIOUS AND MORAL INTERESTS OF\nTHE COMMUNITY.\n\nWITH A NOTICE OF THE AUTHOR'S\n\n\"EXPLANATIONS:\"\n\nA SEQUEL TO THE VESTIGES.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n_Originally printed in a Supplement of_ THE ATLAS _Newspaper of August\n30 and December 20, 1845._\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nLONDON: EFFINGHAM WILSON, ROYAL EXCHANGE. J. VINCENT, OXFORD; G.\nANDREWS, DURHAM; J. TEPPELL, NORWICH; BRODIE AND CO., SALISBURY. A. AND\nC. BLACK, EDINBURGH; D. ROBERTSON, GLASGOW; A. BROWN AND CO., ABERDEEN.\nW. CURRY, JUN., AND CO., DUBLIN.\n\n1846.\n\n\n\n\nADVERTISEMENT.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThe following tractate first appeared in the form of a literary review\nin a supplement of the ATLAS; but two impressions of that journal having\nbeen long since exhausted, and inquiries still continuing numerous and\nurgent, the proprietor has granted permission for the article to be\nreprinted in a separate, more convenient, and perhaps enduring vehicle\nthan that of a newspaper.\n\nFew works of a scientific import have been published that so promptly\nand deeply fixed public attention as the _Vestiges of Creation_, or\nelicited more numerous replies and sharper critical analysis and\ndisquisition. Upon so vast a question as the evolution of universal\ncreation differences of opinion were natural and unavoidable. Many have\ndisputed the accuracy of some of the author's facts, and the sequence\nand validity of his inductive inferences; but few can withhold from him\nthe praise of a patient and intrepid spirit of inquiry, much occasional\neloquence, and very considerable powers of analysis, systematic\ninduction, arrangement and combination.\n\nIn what follows the leading objects kept in view have been--first, an\nexpository outline of the author's facts and argument; next, of the\nchief reasons by which they have been impugned by Professor SEDGWICK,\nProfessor WHEWELL, Mr. BOSANQUET, and others who have entered the lists\nof controversy. These arrayed, the concluding purpose fitly followed of\na brief exhibition of the relative strength of the main points in issue,\nwith their bearing on the moral and religious interests of the\ncommunity.\n\nIt is the fourth and latest edition that has been submitted to\ninvestigation. In this impression the author has introduced several\ncorrections and alterations, without, however, any infringement or\nmitigation of its original scope and character. More recently appeared\nhis \"Explanations,\" a Sequel to the \"Vestiges of the Natural History of\nCreation;\" in which the author endeavours to elucidate and strengthen\nhis former position. This had become necessary in consequence of the\nnumber of his opponents, and the inquiry and discussion to which the\noriginal publication had given rise. Of this, also, a lengthened review\nwas given in the ATLAS, which has been included; so that the reader will\nnow have before him a succinct outline of a novel and interesting topic\nof philosophical investigation.\n\nIn the present reprint a few corrections have been made, and the\nillustrative table at page 34, and some other additions, introduced.\n\n_London, January_ 1, 1846.\n\n\n\n\nAN EXPOSITORY OUTLINE\n\nOF THE\n\n\"VESTIGES OF THE NATURAL HISTORY OF CREATION.\"\n\n\nIt rarely happens that speculative inquiries in England command much\nattention, and the _Vestiges of Creation_ would have probably formed no\nexception, had it not been from the unusual ability with which the work\nhas been executed. The subject investigated is one of vast, almost\nuniversal, interest; for everyone--the low, in common with the high in\nintellect--find enigmas in creation that they would gladly have\nunriddled, and promptly gather round the oracle who has boldly stepped\nforth to cut the knot of their perplexities. The first impression made,\ntoo, is favourable. No very striking originality, eloquence, or genius,\nis displayed; yet there is ingenuity; and though the author betrays the\nzeal of an advocate, desirous of leading to a determinate and _material_\nconclusion, his address, like that of the apostle of temperance, is\nmostly mild and equable, with occasionally a little gentlemanly fervour\nto give animation to his discourse. His style is mostly felicitous,\nsometimes beautiful, lucid, precise, and elevated. In tone and manner of\nexecution, in quiet steadiness of purpose, in the firm, intrepid spirit\nwith which truth, or that which is conceived to be true, is followed,\nregardless of startling presentments, the _Vestiges_ call to mind the\n_Mecanique Celeste_, or _Systeme du Monde_. In caution, as in science,\nthe author is immeasurably inferior to LAPLACE; but in magnitude and\nboldness of design he transcends the illustrious Frenchman. LAPLACE\nsought no more than to subject the celestial movements to the formulas\nof analysis, and reconcile to common observation terrestrial\nappearances; but our author is far more ambitious--more venturesome in\naim--which is nothing less than to lift the veil of ISIS, and solve the\nphenomena of universal nature. With what success remains to be\nconsidered. That great skill and cleverness, that a very superior\nmastery is evinced, we have conceded, and, we will also add, great show\nof fairness in treatment and conclusion.\n\nNo partial opening is made; the great design, in all its extent, is\nmanfully grappled with. The universe is first surveyed, next the mystery\nof its origin. After ranging through sidereal space, examining the\nbodies found there, their arrangement, formation, and evolution, the\nauthor selects our own planet for especial interrogation. He disembowels\nit, scrutinizing the internal evidences of its structure and history,\nand thence infers the causes of past vicissitudes, existing relations,\nand appearances. These disposed of, the surface is explored, the\nphenomena of animal and vegetable existence contemplated, and the\nsources of vital action, sexual differences, and diversities of species\nassigned. Man, as the supreme head and last work of progressive\ncreation, challenges a distinct consideration; his history and mental\nconstitution are investigated, and the relation in which a sublime\nreason stands to the instinct of brutes discriminated. The end and\npurpose of all appropriately form the concluding theme, which finished,\nthe curtain drops, and the last sounds heard are that the name of the\nGreat Unknown will probably never be revealed; that \"praise will elicit\nno response,\" nor any \"word of censure\" be parried or deprecated.\n\n\"Give me,\" exclaimed ARCHIMEDES, \"a fulcrum, and I will raise the\nearth.\" \"Give me,\" says the author of the _Vestiges_, \"gravitation and\ndevelopment, and I will create a universe.\" ALEXANDER'S ambition was to\nconquer a world, our author's is to create one. But he is wrong in\nsaying that his is the \"first attempt to connect the natural sciences\ninto a history of creation, and thence to eliminate a view of nature as\none grand system of causation.\" The attempt has been often made, but\nutterly failed; its results have been found valueless, hurtful--to have\noccupied without enlarging the intellect, and the very effort has long\nbeen discountenanced. Great advances, however, have been made in science\nsince system-making began to be discredited; nature has been\nperseveringly ransacked in all her domains, and many extraordinary\nsecrets drawn from her laboratory. Astronomy and geology, chemistry and\nelectricity, have greatly extended the bounds of knowledge; still, we\napprehend, we are not yet sufficiently armed with facts to resolve into\none consistent whole her infinite variety.\n\nEfforts at generalization, however, and the systematic arrangement of\nnatural phenomena, are seldom wholly fruitless. If false, they tend to\nprovoke discussion--to lead to active thought and useful research. A\nsolitary truth, though new and useful, rarely obtains higher distinction\nthan to be quietly placed on the rolls of science, while a bold\nspeculation, traversing the whole field of creation, and smoothing all\nits difficulties, satisfies for the moment, and fixes general attention.\nOf this the _Vestiges of Creation_ are an example. Without adding to our\npositive knowledge by a single new discovery, demonstration, or\nexperiment, they have excited more interest than the _Principia_ of\nNEWTON. From this popular success, if good do not accrue, no great evil\nneed be anticipated. Hypotheses are most hurtful when accredited by an\nirreversible authority--when erected into a tribunal without appeal,\nthey become the arbitrary dictator in lieu of the handmaid of science.\nDiscussion and invention, in place of being stimulated, are then\nfettered by them; the human mind is enslaved, as Europe was for\ncenturies by the _Physics_ of ARISTOTLE, and still continues to be in\nsome of the ancient retreats and conservatories of exploded errors. But\nthese form the exceptions, not the rule of the age, which is free and\nequal inquiry. Errors have ceased to have prescriptive immunities; and\nmere conjectures, however sanctioned or plausible, if inconsistent with\nscience--with the ascertained facts of experiment and observation, are\nspeedily passed into the region of dreams and chimeras.\n\nWhether this will be the fate of our author remains to be proved. The\nmoment selected for his appearance has at least been well chosen. The\n_Vestiges_ have the air of novelty, a long time having elapsed since any\none had the hardihood to propound a new system of Nature. In common with\nmost manifestations of our time, his effort exhibits a marked\nimprovement on the crudities of his predecessors in the same line of\narchitectural ambition. Science has been called to his aid, and the\npatient ingenuity with which he has sought to make the latest\ndiscoveries subservient to his purpose challenges admiration, if not\nacquiescence. Some of our contemporaries have been warmed into almost\ntheological aversion by the boldness of his conclusions, but we see\nlittle cause for fear, and none for bitterness or apprehension. More\nclosely Nature is investigated and deeper the impression will become of\nher majesty and might. Unlike earthly greatnesses, she loses no\npower--no grandeur--no fascination--no prestige, by familiarity. The\ngreatest philosophers will always rank among her greatest admirers and\nmost devout and fervent worshippers.\n\nHad our author proved all he has assumed our faith would not be\nlessened, nor our wonder diminished. Whether matter or spirit has been\nthe world's architect, the astounding miracle of its creation is not the\nless. What does it import whether it resulted direct from the fiat of\nOmnipotence, or intermediately from the properties He impressed, or the\nlaw of development He prescribed? He who gave the law, who infused the\nenergies by which Chaos was transmuted into an organized universe,\nremains great and inscrutable as ever.\n\nIt is time, however, that we entered upon a more detailed and closer\ninvestigation of the _Vestiges of Creation_. Our purpose is not hastily,\nand without examination, to deprecate, deny, or controvert; but\npatiently, and without prejudice, to inquire, to submit faithfully and\nintelligibly the outlines of a remarkable treatise; describe briefly its\nscope and bearing, the arguments by which they are supported, and the\ncounter reasons by which they appear to be wholly or partially impugned.\nOur readers will thus be enabled to appreciate the merits of a\ncontroversy, the most comprehensive and interesting that for a\nlengthened period has occupied the attention of the scientific and\nintellectual world.\n\nFor greater clearness of exposition we shall endeavour to follow the\norder observed by the author in the division and treatment of his\nsubjects, commencing first with the\n\n\nBODIES OF SPACE.\n\nThe author opens his subject with a brief but luminous outline of the\narrangement and formation of the astral and planetary systems of the\nheavens. He first describes the solar system, of which our earth is a\nmember, consisting of the sun, planets, and satellites with the less\nintelligible orbs termed comets, and taking as the uttermost bounds of\nthis system the orbit of Uranus, it occupies a portion of space not less\nthan three thousand six hundred millions of miles in diameter. The mind\ncannot form an exact notion of so vast an expanse, but an idea of it may\nbe obtained from the fact, that, if the swiftest racehorse ever known\nhad began to traverse it at full speed at the time of the birth of\nMOSES, he would only yet have accomplished half his journey. Vast as is\nthe solar system, it is only one of an infinity of others which may be\nstill more extensive. Our sun is supposed to be a star belonging to a\nconstellation of stars, each of which has its accompaniment of revolving\nplanets; and the constellation itself with similar constellations to\nform revolving clusters round some mightier centre of attraction; and so\non, each astral combination increasing in number, magnitude, and\ncomplexity, till the mind is utterly lost in the vain effort to grasp\nthe limitless arrangement.\n\nOf the stars astronomers can hardly be said to know anything with\ncertainty. Sirius, which is the most lustrous, was long supposed to be\nthe nearest and most within the reach of observation, but all attempts\nto calculate the distance of that luminary have proved futile. Of its\ninconceivable remoteness some notion may be formed by the fact, that the\ndiameter of the earth's annual orbit, if viewed from it, would dwindle\ninto an invisible point. This is what is meant by the stars not having,\nlike the planets, a _parallax_; that is, the earths' orbit, as seen from\nthem, does not subtend a measurable angle. With two other stars,\nhowever, astronomers have unexpectedly and recently been more fortunate\nthan with Sirius, and have been able to calculate their distances from\nthe earth. The celebrated BESSEL, and soon afterwards, the late Mr.\nHENDERSON, astronomer royal for Scotland, were the first to surmount the\ndifficulty that had baffled the telescopic resources of the HERSCHELS.\nBESSEL detected a parallax of one-third of a second in the star 61\nCygni, and in the constellation of the Centaur HENDERSON found another\nstar whose parallax amounted to one second. Of the million of fixed\nglittering points that adorn the sky, these are the only two whose\ndistances have been calculated, and to express them, miles, leagues, or\norbits seems inadequate. Light, whose speed is known to be 192,000 miles\nper second, would be three years in reaching our earth from the star of\nHENDERSON; and starting from BESSEL'S star and moving at the same rate\nit could only reach us in ten years. These are the nearest stars, but\nthere are others whose distances are immeasurably greater, and whose\nlight, though starting from them at the beginning of creation, may not\nhave reached our globe!\n\nThe stars visible to the eye are about 3,000, but the number increases\nwith every increase of telescopic power, and may be said to be\ninnumerable. They are not of uniform lustre or form, but vary in figure\nand brightness. Some of them have a _nebulous_ or cloudy appearance; and\nthere are entire clusters with this dusky aspect, mostly pervaded,\nhowever, with luminous points of more brilliant hue. In the outer fields\nof astral space Sir WILLIAM HERSCHEL observed a multitude of nebulae, one\nor two of which may be seen by the naked eye. All of them, when seen by\ninstruments of low power, look like masses of luminous vapour; but some\nof them had brighter spots, suggesting to Sir WILLIAM the idea of a\ncondensation of the nebulous matter round one or more centres. But when\nthese luminous masses are examined by more powerful instruments many of\nthem lose their cloudy form, and are resolved into shining points, \"like\nspangles of diamond dust.\" It is in this way several nebulae have yielded\nto the gigantic reflector of Lord ROSSE, and others with still greater\noptical resources may follow. This brings us to the first questionable\nand controversial portion of the _Vestiges_; namely,--the\n\n\nNEBULAR HYPOTHESIS.\n\nIt is among the gaseous bodies just described, in the outer boundary of\nNature, which neither telescope nor geometry can well reach, that\nspeculation has laid its _venue_, and commenced its aerial castles.\nLAPLACE was the first to suggest the nebular hypothesis, which he did\nwith great diffidence, not as a theory proved, or hardly likely, but as\na mathematical possibility or illustration. His range of creation,\nmoreover, was not so vast as that of our author, which assumes to\ncompass the entire universe, but was limited to the evolution of the\nsolar system. The mode in which this might be evolved, LAPLACE thus\nexplains:--\n\nHe conjectures that in the original condition of the solar system the\nsun revolved upon his axis, surrounded by an atmosphere which, in virtue\nof an excessive heat, extended far beyond the orbits of all the planets,\nthe planets as yet having no existence. The heat gradually diminished,\nand as the solar atmosphere contracted by cooling, the rapidity of its\nrotation increased by the laws of rotatory motion, and an exterior zone\nof vapour was detached from the rest, the central attraction being no\nlonger able to overcome the increased centrifugal force. The zone of\nvapour might in some cases retain its form, as we still see in Saturn's\nring; but more usually the ring of vapour would break into several\nmasses, and these would generally coalesce into one mass, which would\nrevolve about the sun. Such portions of the solar atmosphere abandoned\nsuccessively at different distances, would form planets in the state of\nvapour. These masses of vapour, it appears from mechanical laws, would\nhave each its rotatory motion, and as the cooling of the vapour still\nwent on, would each produce a planet that might have satellites and\nrings formed from the planet, in the same manner as the planets were\nformed from the atmosphere of the sun.\n\nAll the known motions of the solar system are consistent and\nreconcileable with this theory of LAPLACE, and upon it the author of the\n_Vestiges_ has enlarged and founded his wider scheme of physical\ncreation. He supposes the void of nature to have been originally filled\nwith a universal FIRE MIST (p. 30), out of which all the celestial orbs\nwere made and put in motion. How this mist was put in activity, and\nresolved into the luminous and revolving bodies that we now see, and one\nof which we inhabit is the first urgent perplexity to surmount in the\nconjecture. It is manifest that if a mist filled the entire region of\nspace, a mist it must for ever remain, unless acted upon by some cause\nadequate to give it new action and arrangement. No sun, no stars or\nplanets could spontaneously emanate from an inert vapour any more than\nfrom nothing. To meet this, his first difficulty, the author supposes\nthat there were certain _nuclei_, or centres of greater condensation,\nanalogous to those still remarked in the nebulae of the heavens, and that\nthese nuclei, by their superior attractive force, consolidated into\nspheres the gaseous matter around them:--\n\n     \"Of nebulous matter,\" says he, \"in its original state we know too\n     little to enable us to suggest _how nuclei should be established in\n     it_. But supposing that from a _peculiarity_ in the constitution\n     nuclei are formed, we know very well how, by the power of\n     gravitation, the process of an aggregation of the neighbouring\n     matter to these nuclei should proceed until masses more or less\n     solid should be detached from the rest. It is a _well-known law in\n     physics, that when fluid matter collects towards, or meets in a\n     centre, it establishes a rotatory motion_. See minor results of\n     this law in the whirlpool and the whirlwind--nay, on so humble a\n     scale as the water sinking through the aperture of a funnel. It\n     thus becomes certain, that when we arrive at the stage of a\n     nebulous star we have a rotation on its axis commenced.\"\n\nUp to this, however, the author has proved nothing. The existence of the\nfire-mist and nuclei are assumptions only, and the way by which he tries\nto account for rotatory motion is clearly erroneous. The aggregation of\nmatter round the nuclei by gravitation would have no such tendency; no\nmore than a perfect balance would of itself have a tendency to move\nabout its fulcrum, or a falling stone to deviate from its vertical\ncourse. Gravitation would indeed compress the particles of matter, but\nits tendency and entire action is towards the nucleus; it compresses\nthem no more on one side of the line of their direction to the centre of\nforce than on any other side; and hence no _lateral_ or _rotatory\nmotion_ would ensue. Rotation, therefore, is yet unaccounted for; though\nthe author says _it is a well-known law in physics_ that when fluid\nmatter collects towards, or meets in a centre, it establishes a rotatory\nmotion; and then for illustration refers to a whirlwind or whirlpool. No\nsuch effect would follow the conditions stated, and an entire ignorance\nis betrayed of the laws of mechanical philosophy. In the whirlpool and\nthe whirlwind the gyration is caused by the fluid passing, not _to_ the\ncentre, but _through_ it and away from it; in the whirlpool downwards\nthrough the place of exit, in the whirlwind upwards to where the vacuum\nhas caused the rapid aggregation.\n\nLAPLACE was too able a mathematician to commit these elementary\nblunders; he did not assume to account for rotation by inapplicable\nlaws, but took for granted that the sun revolved upon its axis, and\nthence communicated a corresponding motion to the bodies thrown from its\nsurface. But our author has sought to advance beyond his teacher, and in\nthis way has shown his ignorance of physics by an egregious mistake. At\nthis point we might stop, without following the ulterior steps by which\nthe solar system is made to evolve out of heated vapour. Having got\nrotation, though by an impossible process, the author falls into the\nillustration already given of the theory of LAPLACE. The rotation of\neach nucleus or sun round its axis produces centrifugal force; that\nforce, by refrigeration, increases beyond the centripetal force of\ngravity; in consequence rings are formed and detached from the surface,\nwhose unequal coherence of parts mostly causes them to break into\nseparate masses or planets, partaking of the motion of the bodies from\nwhich they have been separated, and these primaries in their turn\nbecoming centres of gravitation and centrifugal force, throw off their\nsecondaries, or _moons_.\n\nIn this way the solar system and other systems upon a similar plan of\narrangement, it is conjectured, may have been formed. According to the\nauthor the generative process is still in progress, and new worlds are\nin course of being thrown off from new suns in the confines of creation.\nThese nebulous stars on the outer bounds of space, of varying forms and\nbrightness, are supposed to be the centres of new systems in different\nstages of development, like children of various ages and growth in a\nnumerous family. This is the author's own illustration (p. 20), and\nafter giving it he proceeds:--\n\n     \"Precisely thus, seeing in our astral system many thousands of\n     worlds in all stages of formation, from the most rudimental to that\n     immediately preceding the present condition of those we deem\n     perfect, it is unavoidable to conclude that all the perfect have\n     gone through the various stages which we see in the rudimental.\n     This leads us at once to the conclusion that the whole of our\n     firmament was at one time a diffused mass of nebulous matter,\n     extending through the space which it still occupies. So also, of\n     _course_, must have been the other astral systems. Indeed, we must\n     presume the whole to have been originally in one connected mass,\n     the astral systems being only the first division into parts, and\n     solar systems the second.\n\n     \"The first idea which all this impresses upon us is, that the\n     formation of bodies in space is _still and at present in progress_.\n     We live at a time when many have been formed, and many are still\n     forming. Our own solar system is to be regarded as completed,\n     supposing its perfection to consist in the formation of a series of\n     planets, for there are mathematical reasons for concluding that\n     Mercury is the nearest planet to the sun, which can, according to\n     the laws of the system, exist. But there are other solar systems\n     within our astral systems, which are as yet in a less advanced\n     state, and even some quantities of nebulous matter which have\n     scarcely begun to advance towards the stellar form. On the other\n     hand, there are vast numbers of stars which have all the appearance\n     of being fully formed systems, if we are to judge from the complete\n     and definite appearance which they present to our vision through\n     the telescope. We have no means of judging of the _seniority of\n     systems; but it is reasonable to suppose that among the many, some\n     are older than ours_. There is, indeed, one piece of evidence for\n     the probability of the comparative youth of our system, altogether\n     apart from human traditions and the geognostic appearances of the\n     surface of our planet. This consists in a thin nebulous matter,\n     which is diffused around the sun to nearly the orbit of Mercury, of\n     a very oblately spheroidal shape. This matter, which sometimes\n     appears to our naked eyes, at sunset, in the form of a cone\n     projecting upwards in the line of the sun's path, and which bears\n     the name of the Zodiacal Light, has been thought a residuum or last\n     remnant of the concentrating matter of our system, and thus may be\n     supposed to indicate the comparative recentness of the principal\n     events of our cosmogony. _Supposing the surmise and inference_ to\n     be correct, and they may be held as so far supported by more\n     familiar evidence, we might with the more confidence speak of our\n     system as not amongst the elder born of Heaven, but one whose\n     various phenomena, physical and moral, as yet lay undeveloped,\n     while myriads of others were fully fashioned, and in complete\n     arrangement. Thus, in the sublime chronology to which we are\n     directing our inquiries, we first find ourselves called upon to\n     consider the globe which we inhabit as a child of the sun, elder\n     than Venus and her younger brother Mercury, but posterior in date\n     of birth to Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus; next to regard our\n     whole system as probably of recent formation in comparison with\n     many of the stars of our firmament. We must, however, be on our\n     guard against supposing the earth as a recent globe in our ordinary\n     conceptions of time. From evidence afterwards to be adduced, it\n     will be seen that it cannot be presumed to be less than many\n     hundreds of centuries old. How much older Uranus may be, no one can\n     tell, far less how much more aged may be many of the stars of our\n     firmament, or the stars of other firmaments, than ours.\"\n\nAll this is ingenious and fluently expressed. The author has an easy way\nof surmounting his difficulties by the use of such little auxiliary\nphrases, as \"of course,\" \"it may be surmised,\" \"it is reasonable to\nsuppose,\" and so on; which, though trifling in themselves, help him in\ntheir connecting inferences through many embarrassing perplexities. But\nhis hypothesis is yet unproved; his fire-mist is only a conjecture; his\nnuclei, scattered like so many eggs in space out of which future suns\nand worlds are in process of incubation, is of the same description, and\nrotation, the first step in his process of creation, would not ensue\nunder the conditions he has assigned. Without dwelling on these\nshortcomings, we shall terminate this portion of the author's inquiry\nwith a few general strictures. First, on its inconsistency with what we\nknow of the solar system; and, secondly, on its inadequacy to explain\nthe facts of which we are cognizant on our own globe.\n\nIn the first place, for the hypothesis to be applicable to our system,\nit is requisite that the primary and secondary bodies should revolve,\nboth in their orbits and round their axes, in one direction, and nearly\nin one plane. Most of the bodies of the system observe these laws, their\norbits are nearly circular, nearly in the plane of the original equator\nof the solar rotation, and in the direction of that rotation. But there\nare exceptions; the comets, which intersect the equatorial plane in\nevery angle of direction form one, and the most distant of the planets\nforms another. The satellites of Uranus are retrograde. They move from\neast to west in orbits highly inclined to that of their primary, and on\nboth accounts are exceptions to the order of the other secondary bodies.\nOur author is so perplexed by this inconsistency that he first doubts\nthe fact, and next tries to explain it by alleging that \"it may be owing\nto a _bouleversement_ of the primary.\" What is meant by the\n_bouleversement_ of a planet none of his critics seem to apprehend, nor\ndo we. But that the moons of Uranus are contrariwise to those of the\nother planets, Sir JOHN HERSCHEL has indubitably established; so that\nthe author at any rate upon this point has sustained a bouleversement.\n\nOur own moon forms a third exception to his theory. According to his\nsystem, this satellite is a slip or graft from our planet, and in\nconstitution, it might be inferred, would partake of the elements of the\nparent. But the fact is otherwise. The moon has no atmosphere, no seas,\nor rivers, nor any water, and of course totally unfit for human\ninhabitants, or organic life of any kind. It must, then, have had a\ndifferent origin, or be in some earlier stage of development than that\nthrough which our earth has passed.\n\nLeaving these exceptions, we may next inquire into the relevant purposes\nof the nebular hypothesis, supposing its assumptions acquiesced in. Like\nthe fanciful theories of the ancient philosophers, it seems only to\ninvolve a profitless topic of controversy, without solving natural\nphenomena. It does not unravel the mystery of the beginning, brings us\nno nearer to the first creative force. Like a good chemist, previous to\nanalysis, the author first throws all matter into a state of solution;\nbut granting him his fire-mist and nuclei in the midst, how or whence\ncame this condition and arrangement of nature? What was its pre-existing\nstate? or, if that be answered, how or whence was that preceding state\neduced, for it, too, must have had one prior to it? So that the mind\nmakes no advances by such inquiries, is lost in a maze that can have no\nend, because it has no beginning; and, like Noah's messenger, for want\nof a resting place, is compelled to return to the first starting point.\nEasier, and quite as satisfactory, it seems to believe, as we have been\ntaught to believe, that the celestial spheres were at once perfect and\nentire, projected into space from the hands of the maker, than that they\nwere elaborated out of luminous vapour by gravity and condensation.\nHopeless inquiry is thus foreclosed, an inquisition that cannot be\nanswered, silenced, and removed out of the pale of discussion.\n\nIt is not from any attribute of the Deity being impugned that the\nhypothesis is objectionable. Design and intelligence in the creation are\nleft paramount as before, and our impression of the skill exercised, and\nthe means employed, only transferred to another part of the work. He who\nproduced the primordial condition the author supposes, who filled space\nwith such a mist, composed of such materials, subjected to such laws,\nsuch constitution, that sun, moon, and stars necessarily resulted from\nthem, appears omnipotent as ever. But it does not advance inquiry, nor\nassist us in explaining the wonders we contemplate in our own globe.\nSuppose a planet formed by the author's process, what kind of a body\nwould it be? Something, as Professor WHEWELL suggests, resembling a\nlarge meteoric stone. How after wards came this unformed mass to be like\nour earth, to be covered with motion and organization, with life and\ngeneral felicity? What primitive cause stocked it with plants and\nanimals, and produced all the surprising and subtle contrivances which\nwe find in their structure, all the wide and profound mutual dependence\nwhich we trace in their economy? Is it possible to conceive, as the\n_Vestiges_ inculcate, that man, with his sentiment and intellect, his\npowers and passions, his will and conscience, were also produced as the\nultimate result of vapourous condensation?\n\nOne more conjecture of the author, in this division of his subject, we\nshall only notice. It is that \"the formation of bodies in space _is\nstill in progress_.\" What may be doing in the nebulae, in the region\nscarcely within reach of telescopic vision, in what may be considered\nthe yet uninclosed and commonable waste of the universe, is a subject,\nwe suspect, of much obscurity, and respecting which no precise\nintelligence has been received; but limiting attention to the solar\nsystem, which is nearer home and more within cognizance, the work seems\nfinished, perfect, and unchangeable, and, like the Great Architect, made\nto endure for ever. This was the conclusion of LAPLACE; he proved that\nthe state of our system is _stable_; that is, the ellipsis the planets\ndescribe will always remain nearly circular, and the axis of revolution\nof the earth will never deviate much from its present position. He also\ngave a mathematical proof that this stability is not accidental, but the\nresult of design, of an arrangement by which the planets all move in the\nsame direction, in orbits of small eccentricity and slightly inclined to\neach other. Reasoning from analogy, as the author of the _Vestiges_ is\nprone to do--extending our views from our solar system to other\nsystems--other suns and revolving planets--it is fair to conclude that\nthey are not less perfect in arrangement--subject to like conditions of\npermanency, and alike exempt from mutation, decay, collision, or\nextinction.\n\nDescending from this high region, we accompany the author to his next\nand lower field--the\n\n\nEARTH AND ITS GEOLOGICAL HISTORY.\n\nOur globe is somewhat less than 8,000 miles in diameter; it is of a\nspheroidal form, the equatorial exceeding the polar axis in the\nproportion of 300 to 299, and which slight inequality, in consequence of\nits diurnal revolution, is necessary to preserve the land near the\nequator from inundation by the sea. The mean density or average weight\nof the earth is, in proportion to that of distilled water, as 5.66 to 1.\nSo that its specific gravity is considerably less than that of tin, the\nlightest of the metals, but exceeds that of granite, which is three\ntimes heavier than water.\n\nDescending below the surface, the first sensation that strikes is the\nincrease of temperature. This is so rapid, that for every one hundred\nfeet of sinking we obtain an increase of more than one degree of\nFahrenheit's thermometer. If there be no interruption to this law, and\nno reason exists to conclude there is, it is manifest that at the depth\nof a few miles we must reach an intensity of heat utterly unbearable.\nHence it follows that by no improvements in machinery can mining\noperations be carried down to a great depth below the surface. The\ngreatest depth yet penetrated does not exceed three thousand feet, and\nforms a very small advance towards the earth's centre, distant 4,000\nmiles.\n\nGeologists, however, without penetrating far into the earth, have found\nmeans for obtaining an insight for several miles into its interior\nstructure, and armed with hammer, chisel, and climbing hook, they\nexplore the beetling sea-cliff, traverse the deepest valleys, and scale\nthe highest mountains, carefully examining their formation, disposition,\nand substance, and are thus enabled to obtain some knowledge of the\nearth's stomach, as it were, by scrutinising the deposits and eruptive\nejectments on its surface. For example, we come to a mountain composed\nof a particular substance with strata or beds of other rock lying\nagainst its sloped sides; we, of course, infer that the substance of the\nmountain dips away under the strata that we see lying against it.\nSuppose that we walk away from the mountain across the turned-up edges\nof the stratified rocks, and that for many miles we continue to pass\nover other stratified rocks, all disposed in the same way, till we begin\nto cross the opposite edges of the same beds; after which we pass over\nthese rocks all in reverse order, till we come to another extensive\nmountain composed of similar materials to the first, and shelving away\nunder the strata in the same way; we should then infer that the\nstratified rocks occupied a basin formed by the rocks of these two\nmountains, and by calculating the thickness right through these strata\ncould say to what depths the rock of the mountain extended below. In\nthis way has the interior of the globe been examined, and its contents\nand arrangement, for several miles below the surface, ascertained. The\nresult of such inspection we leave the author of the _Vestiges_ to\ndescribe:--\n\n     \"It appears that the basis rock of the earth, as it may be called,\n     is of hard texture, and crystalline in its constitution. Of this\n     rock, granite may be said to be the type, though it runs into many\n     varieties. Over this, except in the comparatively few places where\n     it projects above the general level in mountains, other rocks are\n     disposed in sheets or strata, with the appearance of having been\n     deposited originally from water. But these last rocks have nowhere\n     been allowed to rest in their original arrangement. Uneasy\n     movements from below have broken them up in great inclined masses,\n     while in many cases there has been projected through the rents\n     rocky matter more or less resembling the great inferior crystalline\n     mass. This rocky matter must have been in a state of fusion from\n     heat at the time of its projection, for it is often found to have\n     run into and filled up lateral chinks in these rents. There are\n     even instances where it has been rent again, and a newer melted\n     matter of the same character sent through the opening. Finally, in\n     the crust as thus arranged, there are, in many places, chinks\n     containing veins of metal. Thus, there is first a great inferior\n     mass, composed of crystalline rock, and probably resting\n     immediately on the fused and expanded matter of the interior: next,\n     layers or strata of aqueous origin; next, irregular masses of\n     melted inferior rock that have been sent up volcanically and\n     confusedly at various times amongst the aqueous rocks, breaking up\n     these into masses, and tossing them out of their original levels.\"\n\nThis, we believe, is a correct outline of the crust of the earth, so far\nas it has been possible to observe it. It exhibits extraordinary signs\nof commotion and vicissitude; the lowest rocks indicating a previous\ncondition of igneous fusion; those above them of aqueous solution. Fire\nand water have thus been the chief tellurian anarchists, and the shaking\nof continents and the constant shifting of level in sea and land still\ncontinue to attest their restless energies. That igneous matter has,\nduring many periods, been protruded from below--that mountains have\nrisen in succession from the sea, and injected their molten substance\nthrough cracks and fissures of superincumbent strata--are facts resting\non indubitable evidence. Many masses of granite became the solid bottom\nof some portions of the sea before the secondary strata were laid\ngradually upon them. The granite of Mont Blanc rose during a recent\ntertiary period. \"We can prove,\" says Professor SEDGWICK, \"more than\nmere shiftings of level, and that many portions of sea and land have\nentirely changed their places. The rocks at the top of Snowdon are full\nof petrified sea-shells; the same may be said of some high crests of the\nAlps, Pyrenees, and Andes. We have proof demonstrative that many parts\nof Scotland, and that all England, formed, during many ages, the solid\nbottom of the sea. It may be true that the antagonist powers of nature\nduring the human period have reached a kind of balance. But during all\ngeological periods there have been such long intervals of repose, or of\nsuch gradual movements, that we may trace the history of the earth in\nthe successive deposits formed in the waters of the sea.\" This is the\ngreat business of geology.\n\nAlthough at first sight the interior of the earth appears a confused\nscene, after careful observation we readily detect in it a regularity\nand order from which much instructive light is thrown on its past\nvicissitudes. The deposition of the aqueous rocks and the projection of\nthe volcanic have unquestionably taken place since the settlement of the\nearth in its present form. They are, indeed, of an order of events which\nare going on under the agency of intelligible causes, down to the\npresent day. We may therefore consider these generally as recent\ntransactions. But advancing to the far distant antecedent era of its\nexistence, we may consider it to have been a globe of its present size\nenveloped in the crystalline rock already described, with the waters of\nthe present seas and the present atmosphere around it, though these were\nprobably in considerably different conditions, both as to temperature\nand their constituent materials, from what they now are. We may thus\npresume that, without this primitive case of granitic texture, the great\nbulk of the matters of our earth were agglomerated, whether in a fluid\nor solid state is uncertain; but there cannot be any doubt that they\ncontinue to exist in a condition of great heat and compression, having a\nmean density of more than double that of the minerals on the surface.\n\nJudging from the results and still observable conditions, it may be\ninferred that the heat retained in the interior of the globe was more\nintense, or had greater freedom to act, in some places than in others.\nThese become the scenes of volcanic operations, and in time marked their\nsituations by the extrusion from below of trap and basalts--rocks\ncomposed of the crystalline matter, fused by intense heat, and developed\non the surface in various conditions, according to the particular\ncircumstances under which it was sent up; some, for example, being\nthrown up under water, and some in the open air, which contingencies\nwould make considerable difference in its texture and appearance. It\nwould, however, be a mistake to infer that, previous to these eruptions,\nthe earth was a smooth ball, with air and water playing round it.\nGeology tells us plainly that there were great irregularities--lofty\nmountains, interspersed with deep seas--and by which, perhaps, the\nmountains were wholly or partially covered. But it is a fact worthy of\nobservation that the solids of our globe cannot for a moment be exposed\nto water or the atmosphere without becoming liable to change. They\ninstantly begin to wear down. The matter so worn off being carried into\nthe neighbouring depths and there deposited, became the components of\nthe successive series of stratified rocks, extending from the basal\nenvelope of granite to the earth's surface, and which it will be proper\nbriefly to describe.\n\n\nDEPOSITS OR ROCK FORMATIONS.\n\nThe first of the series is the _Gneis and Mica Slate System_, of which\nexamples are exposed to view in the Highlands of Scotland and the west\nof England. These earliest stratified rocks contain no matters which are\nnot to be found in the primitive granite. They are the same in\nmaterial--silica, mica, quartz, or hornblende--but changed into new\nforms and combinations, and hence called by Mr. LYELL metamorphic rocks.\nSome of them are composed exclusively of one of the materials of\ngranite; the _mica schist_, for example, of mica; the _quartz rocks_,\nof quartz. In the metamorphic rocks no organic remains have been found,\nand they are geologically below all the rocks that do contain traces of\nanimal life.\n\nFrom the primary rocks we pass into the next ascending series, called\nthe _Clay Slate and Grauwacke Slate System_, which in some places is\nfound resting immediately on the granite, the antecedent bed being there\nwanting. This deposit has been well examined, because some of its slate\nbeds have been extensively quarried for domestic purposes. By some\ngeologists it is called the _Silurian System_, it being largely\ndeveloped at the surface of a district of western England formerly\noccupied by the Silures. It is found also in North Wales and in the\nnorth of England, in beds of great thickness, and in Scotland, but there\nthe Silurian rocks are more feebly represented.\n\nThe _Old Red Sandstone, or Devonian System_, comes next. It forms the\nmaterial of the grand and rugged mountains which fringe many parts of\nour Highland coasts, and ranges, on the south flank of the Grampians,\nfrom the eastern to the western sea of Scotland. There is no part of\ngeology and science more clear than that which refers to the ages of\nmountains. It is as certain that the Grampian mountains are older than\nthe Alps and Apennines, as it is that civilisation had reached Italy and\nenabled her to subdue the world, while Scotland was the abode of\nbarbarism. The Pyrenees, Carpathians, and other ranges of continental\nEurope are all younger than these Scotch hills, or even the\ninsignificant Mendip Hills of southern England. Stratification tells\nthis tale as plainly, and more truly, than LIVY tells the story of the\nRoman republic. It tells us that at the time when the Grampians sent\nstreams and detritus to straits where now the valleys of the Forth and\nClyde meet, the greater part of Europe was a wide ocean.\n\nThe last three series of strata contain the remains of the earliest\noccupants of the globe, and of which we shall soon speak. They are of\nenormous thickness--in England, not much less than 30,000 feet, or\nnearly six miles.\n\nWe have now arrived at the secondary rocks, of which the lowest group is\nthe _Carboniferous Formation_, so called from its remarkable feature of\nnumerous interspersed beds of coal. It commences with beds of the\nmountain limestone, which in England attains a depth of 800 yards. Coal\nis altogether composed of the matter of a terrestrial vegetation,\ntransmuted by putrefaction of a peculiar kind beneath the surface of\nwater, and in the absence of air. From examples seen at the present day\nat the mouths of such rivers as the Mississippi, which traverse\nextensive sylvan regions, it is thought that the vegetation, the rubbish\nof decayed forests, was carried by rivers into estuaries, and there\naccumulated into vast natural rafts, until it sank to the bottom, where\nan overlayer of sand or mud would prepare it for becoming a stratum of\ncoal. Others conceive that the vegetation first went into the condition\nof peat moss, that a sink in a level then exposed it to be overrun by\nthe sea and covered with a layer of sand or mud; that a subsequent\nuprise made the mud dry land, and fitted it to bear a new forest, which\nafterwards, like its predecessors, became a bed of peat--that, in short,\nby repetitions of this process the alternate layers of coal, sand and\nshell constituting the carboniferous group were formed.\n\nThe _Magnesian Limestone_ deposits succeed the carboniferous, and\nsometimes pass into them by insensible gradations. In the south of\nEngland they are represented by conglomerates, and partly composed of\nthe solid and more or less rounded fragments of the older strata. They\nafford a proof of what geologists have often occasion to remark of the\nlong periods of time during which the ancient works of nature were\nperfected; for the older rocks were solid as they are now, and their\norganic remains petrified at the time these conglomerates were forming.\n\nWe can only briefly glance at the remaining chapters of geological\nhistory. The _New Red Sandstone_ forms the base of the great central\nplains of England, and is surmounted by the oliferous marls and red\narenaceous beds which pass under the succession of great oolitic\nterraces that stretch across England from the coasts of Dorsetshire to\nthe north-eastern coast of Yorkshire. It marks the commencement of an\nimportant era, being the strata in which land animals are first found.\nThe _Oolte System_ which follows marks the beginning of mammalia, and in\nsome of its beds in Buckinghamshire are found the exuviae of tropical\ntrees. Near Weymouth, in the well-known dirt beds, are found trees with\ntheir silicified trunks growing up in the position of nature, and their\nroots embedded in the soil on which they grew.\n\nNext we have the chalk or _Cretaceous Formation_, that makes such a\nconspicuous figure in England. The celebrated cliffs of Dover are of\nthis era. It forms a stripe from Yorkshire to Kent, and is found in\nFrance, Germany, Russia, and in North America. The English chalk beds\nare 1,200 feet thick, showing the considerable depth of the ocean in\nwhich they were formed. Their origin has been a questionable topic; they\nwere thought to be formed from the detritus of coral reefs, but\nProfessor EHRENBERG has recently announced, as the result of his\nmicroscopical researches, that chalk is composed partly of inorganic\nparticles and partly of shells of inconceivable minuteness, a cubic inch\nof the substance containing about ten millions of them.\n\nIn the hollows of the chalk-beds have been formed series of\nstrata--clay, limestone, marl alternating--to which the name of the\n_Tertiary System_ has been given. It is irregularly distributed over\nvast surfaces of all our continents, and must be considered as the beds\nof estuaries left at the conclusion of the cretaceous period. London and\nParis rest on basins of this formation, and another such basin extends\nfrom near Winchester under Southampton, and reappears in the Isle of\nWight.\n\nWe hasten upward to the _Diluvial System_, which brings us near to the\npresent surface. To this era is referred the erratic blocks, or gigantic\nboulder stones, which have been driven by floods across our continents,\nor drifted in icebergs over valleys, and perched sometimes on mountain\ntops. To it also must be referred the _till_ of Scotland and the great\nbrown clay of England, and our vast beds of gravel and superficial\nrubbish, connected with the deluvium in the history of _ossiferous\ncaverns_, of which that examined by Dr. BUCKLAND at Kirkdale is an\nexample. They occur in the calcareous strata, as the great caverns\ngenerally do, and have in all instances been naturally closed up till\nthe period of their discovery. At Kirkdale the remains of twenty-four\nspecies of animals were found--namely, pigeon, lark, raven, duck,\npartridge, mouse, water-rat, rabbit, hare, hippopotamus, rhinoceros,\nelephant, weasel, fox, wolf, deer, ox, horse, bear, tiger, hyena. From\nmany of the bones of the gentler of these animals being found in a\nbroken state, it is supposed that the cave was the haunt of hyenas and\nother predaceous animals, by which the smaller ones had been consumed.\n\nWe come last to the _Modern_ or _Superficial Formation_, of which the\nbest specimen is the great Bedford level, that spreads over the lower\nlands of Norfolk, Cambridgeshire, and Lincolnshire, consisting of\naccumulations of silt, drifted matter, and bog-earth, some of which\nbegan before the earliest periods of British history. When these\naccumulations are removed by artificial means, we find below sometimes\nshells of recent species, and the remains of an old estuary, sometimes\nsand-banks, gravel beds, stumps of trees, and masses of drifted wood. On\nthis recent surface are found skulls of a living species of European\nbear, skeletons of the Arctic wolf, European beaver and wild boar, and\nnumerous horns and bones of the roebuck and red deer, and of the\ngigantic stag or Irish elk. They testify to a zoology on the verge of\nthat now prevailing or melting into it. In corresponding deposits of\nNorth America are found remains of the mammoth, mastadon, buffalo, and\nother animals of extinct or living species.\n\nConsidering it best not to interrupt the description of the successive\nformations, this is almost the only allusion that has been made to the\nfossils which constitute so important a part of geological science. It\nis now to be explained that from an early period, that is, from the\nmetamorphic deposit to the close of the rock series, each formation is\nfound to enclose remains of the organic beings, plants, and animals,\nwhich flourished upon earth during the time they were forming; and these\norganisms, or such parts of them as were of sufficient solidity, have\nbeen in many instances preserved with the utmost fidelity, although for\nthe most part converted into the substance of the enclosing mineral. The\nrocks may be thus said to form a kind of history of the organic\ndepartments of nature apparently from near their beginning to the\npresent time. It is upon the commencement and progress of life under\nthese circumstances that the author of the _Vestiges of Creation_ has\nput forth some of his most startling and controversial propositions; but\nbefore noticing them it will be useful to prepare the way by shortly\ndescribing the gradations of organic existences, following the same\norder as observed in the rock series, by beginning with the lowest or\nhumblest forms of organization.\n\n\nRISE AND PROGRESS OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS.\n\nThe interior of the earth reveals wonders not less impressive than those\nof the skies. We have seen in the last section how the crust of our\nglobe is composed of successive layers or tiers of strata, rising\nupward, terrace upon terrace, till we reach the present vegetable mould\nor superficial platform of animated existence. In the aggregate these\nformations or systems, marking the several epochs in nature's\ndevelopment, may extend to a depth, as Dr. BUCKLAND conjectures, of ten\nor fifteen miles below the surface, and each may be considered a vast\ncemetery or graveyard, entombing the remains of ages long anterior to\nhuman creation. We, in fact, live upon a pile of worlds, and\nanticipating the future from past records and from changes still\nmanifest from the shallowing soundings of neighbouring seas, it is not\nimprobable that the existing scene of bustle may have heaped upon it as\nmany superincumbent masses as the lowest of the rocks enclosing the\nvestiges of life.\n\nIf not with a kind of awe, it must have certainly been with intense\ncuriosity that the first investigators of fossilology looked upon the\nearliest forms of animated being of which we have any traces as existing\nupon this globe. These first denizens, however, seem to have been of a\nsimple structure and humble order, not fit to play high class\ncharacters. No land animals are found among them, none which could\nbreathe the atmosphere, none but tenants of the water, and even animals\nso high in the scale as fish were wanting. In popular language, the\nearliest fossils are corals and shellfish.\n\nBut to make the subject generally intelligible it will be necessary\nfirst to define the orders of the animal kingdom. CUVIER was the first\nto give a philosophical view of the animal world in reference to the\nplan on which each animal is constructed. According to him there are\nfour forms on which animals have been modelled, and of which ulterior\ndivisions are only slight modifications founded on the development or\naddition of some parts that do not produce any essential change of\nstructure.\n\nThe four great branches of the animal world are the _vertebrata_,\n_mollusca_, _articulata_, and _radiata_. The _vertebrata_ are those\nanimals which (as man and other sucklers, birds and fishes) have a\nbackbone and a skull with lateral appendages, within which the viscera\nare excluded, and to which the muscles are attached. The _mollusca_ or\nsoft animals have no bony skeleton; the muscles are attached to the\nskin, which often include stony plates called shells; such mollusca are\nshell-fish, others are cuttle-fish, and many pulpy sea animals. The\n_articulata_ consist of crustacea (lobsters, &c.), insects, spiders, and\nannulos worms, which, like the other classes of this branch, consist of\na head and a number of successive portions of the body jointed together,\nwhence the name. Finally the _radiata_ include the animals known under\nthe name of zoophytes.\n\nNow it is fossils of the _radiata_ division of the animal kingdom that\nare found in the lowest stratified rocks, polypiaria and crinodia, the\nfirst including various forms of these extraordinary animals\n(corallines) which still abound in tropical seas, often obstructing the\ncourse of the mariner, and even laying the foundation of new continents.\nThe crinoids are an early and simple form of the large family of\nstar-fishes; the animal is little more than a stomach, surrounded by\ntentacula to provide itself with food, and mounted upon a many-jointed\nstalk, so as to resemble a flower upon its stem. Along with these in the\nslate system are a few lowly genera of crustacea, and of a higher class,\nthe mollusca, and the existence of these imply the contemporary\nexistence of certain humbler forms of life, vegetable and animal, for\ntheir subsistence, forming a scene approaching to what is found in seas\nof the present day, excepting that fishes, nor any higher vertebrata, as\nyet roamed the marine wilds.\n\nThe animal species of this era seem to have been few in number, and\nalmost the whole had become extinct before the next group of strata had\nbeen formed. In the Silurian deposit the vestiges of life become more\nabundant, the number of species extended, and important additions made\nin the traces of sea plants and fishes. Remains of fishes have been\ndetected in rocks immediately over the Aymestry limestone, being\napparently the first examples of vertebrated animals which breathed upon\nour planet. (p. 64). The cephaloda, represented in our era by the\nnautilus and cuttle-fish, pertain to the Silurian formation, and are the\nmost highly organised of the mollusca, possessing in some families an\ninternal bony skeleton, together with a heart and a head with mandibles\nnot unlike those of the parrot.\n\nIn the Old Red Sandstone the same marine specimens are continued with\nnumerous additions. Several of the strata are crowded with remains of\nfish, showing that the seas in which these beds were deposited had\nswarmed with that class of inhabitants. The predominating kinds are of\nan inferior model to the two orders which afterwards came into\nexistence, and still are the principal fishes of our seas; the former\nare covered with integuments of a considerably different character from\nthe true scales covering the latter, and which orders, from their form\nof organization, are named stenoid and cycloid.\n\nUp to the present we find proofs of the general uniformity of organic\nlife over the surface of the earth at the time when each particular\nsystem of rocks was formed. The types of being formed in the old red as\nin preceding deposits, are identical in species with the remains that\noccur in the corresponding class of rocks in Brittany, the Hartz,\nNorway, Russia, and North America; attesting the similarity and almost\nuniversality, if not contemporary character, of terrestrial changes. A\nfew other geological facts may be here mentioned for recollection, and\nwhich throw light on the marine animal and vegetable forms of this and\npreceding eras. First there was comparatively an absence of salt in the\nearly ocean; and next the temperature of the earth is conjectured to\nhave been higher, and perhaps almost uniform throughout. The higher\ntemperature of the primeval times is attributed to the greater proximity\nor intensity of the globe's internal heat, and which, poured through\ncracks and fissures of the lately concreted crust, M. BRONGNIART\nsupposes to have been sufficiently great to overpower the ordinary\nmeteorological influences and spread a tropical climate all over its\nsurface.\n\nIt must be further borne in mind that as yet no _land animals or\nplants_ existed, and for this presumable reason, that dry land had not\nappeared. It is only in the next or carboniferous formation that\nevidence is traced of island or continent. As a consequence of this\nemergence there was fresh water; for rain, instead of returning to the\nsea, as formerly, was collected in channels of the earth and became\nsprings, rivers, and lakes. It was made a receptacle for an advance in\norganism, and land plants became a conspicuous part of the new creation.\n\nAccording to the _Vestiges of Creation_, terrestrial botany began with\nclasses of comparatively simple forms and structure. In the ranks of the\nvegetable kingdom the lowest place is taken by plants of cellular\ntissue, and which have no flowers, as lichens, mosses, fungi, ferns, and\nsea-weeds. Above these stand plants with vascular tissue, bearing\nflowers, and of which there are two subdivisions: first, plants having\none seed-lobe, and in which the new matter is added within, of which the\ncane and palm are examples; second, plants having two seed lobes, and in\nwhich the new matter is added on the outside under the bark, of which\nthe pine, elm, oak, and all the British forest trees are examples. Now\nthe author of the _Vestiges_ states that two-thirds of the plants of\nthis era belong to the cellular kind, but to this one of his ablest\ncritics (_Edinburgh Review_ for July) demurs, asserting that the\ncarboniferous epoch shows a gorgeous _flora_--that the first fruits of\nvegetable nature were not rude, ill-fashioned forms, but in magnificence\nand complexity of structure equal to any living types, and that the\nforest approached the rank and complicated display of a tropical jungle,\nwhere the prevalence of great heat with great moisture, combined with\nthe fact that the atmosphere contained a greater proportion of the\nnatural food of plants, must undoubtedly have forcibly stimulated\nvegetation, and in quantity and luxuriance of growth, if not fineness of\norganization, produced it in rich abundance. The earth, it is likely,\nwas one vast forest, which would perform a most important part for the\ngood of its future inhabitants, helping to purge the air of its excess\nof carbonic acid, by which the earth's surface would be prepared for its\nnew occupants.\n\nThe animal remains of this era are not numerous in comparison with those\nthat go before or follow. Contrary to what the author of the _Vestiges_\nsupposes (p. 111), insects were already buzzing in the air; there were,\nhowever, no crawling reptiles on the ground, and it is a doubtful point\nwhether birds cheered the ancient forests with their song. But fishes\nreached their most perfect organic type. They were the lords of\ncreation, and had a structure in conformity with their high office.\nSince then the class has increased in its species, but has degenerated\nto a less noble type.\n\nIn the next formation, the New Red Sandstone, reptiles make their\nappearance. They are considered next to fishes in the zoological scale.\nSo nearly are they sometimes connected, that it is doubtful to which\nclass they belong. Many reptiles are also amphibious, adapted either to\nwater or land. The surface of the globe abounded in large flat, muddy\nshores, and was suited to the new order of visitants called into\nexistence.\n\nIn the Oolite System, mostly consisting of calcareous beds, mammals make\ntheir appearance. Some additions were made to the reptile form. One\nanimal (the behemite) appeared, but terminated in the next era. In the\nfollowing series of rocks mammals increase in abundance. The advance in\nland animals is less marked, but considerable in the tertiary strata.\nThe tapir forms a conspicuous type. One animal of the kind was eighteen\nfeet long, and had a couple of tusks turning down from the lower jaw, by\nwhich it could attach itself, like the walrus, to a bank, while its body\nfloated in the water. Many animals of a former period disappear, and are\nreplaced by others belonging to still existent families--elephant,\nhippopotamus, and rhinoceros--though extinct as species. Some of these\nforms are startling from their size. The great mastadon was a species of\nelephant living on aquatic plants, and reaching the height of twelve\nfeet. The mammoth was another elephant, and supposed to have survived\ntill comparatively recent times. The megatherium is an incongruity of\nnature, of gigantic proportions, yet ranking in a much humbler order\nthan the elephant, that of the edenta, to which the sloth, ant-eater,\nand armadilla belong. The megatherium had a skeleton of enormous\nsolidity, with an armour-clad body, and five toes, terminating in huge\nclaws to grasp the branches on which it fed. Finally, beside the dog,\ncat, squirrel, and bear, we have offered to us, for the first time,\noxen, deer, camel, and other specimens of the rumantia. Traces of the\nquadrumane, or monkey, have been found in the older tertiaries of\nFrance, India, and England. So that we may now be said to have arrived\nat the zoological forms not long antecedent to the appearance of the\nchief of all, bimana, or man, and shall here pause to consider the\nconclusions of the author of the _Vestiges of Creation_ on the origin of\nthe organic existences that have been successively exhibited.\n\nIt will be convenient, however, first to introduce a synoptic view of\nthe evolutions of the earth as set forth in this and the preceding\nsection. For this purpose the author has introduced a parallel table,\nexhibiting on one side a scale of animal life beginning with the\nhumblest and ascending to the highest species; and on the other side the\nsuccessive series of rock formations, in which their fossiliferous\nremains have been found up to the present superficial deposits of the\nglobe. Objections have been made to the correctness of the author's\nanalogies, scale, and his classification of animals, the chief of which\nwill be adverted to in the next section; but the table is essential, as\npresenting at one view an outline of the hypothesis he has sought to\nestablish.\n\n\nSCALE OF ANIMAL KINGDOM.                 ORDER OF ANIMALS IN       ASCENDING SERIES         FOETAL HUMAN BRAIN\n                                                                   OF ROCKS.                RESEMBLES, IN\n       _Invertebrata._\n       1 Infusoria                      _Traces of Infusoria_(?)   1 Gneiss and Mica\\\n                                                                     Slate System    \\\n       2 Polypi                         Polypiaria             \\                      \\\n       5 Echinodermata                  Echinodermata           \\                      \\\n     { 7 Brachiopoda       {15-20       Brachiopoda} Crustacea   } 2 Clay Slate System  \\  1st month, typically,\nMoll-{ 9 Pteropoda   Artic-{Crustacea   Pteropoda  }            /                        } that of an\nusca {10 Gasteropoda ulata {12-14       Gasteropoda} Annelides /                        /  avertebrated animal\n     {11 Cephalopoda       {Annelides   Cephalopoda}            \\                      /\n                                                                 } 3 Silurian system  /\n      _Vertebrata._                   {  _Remains of Fishes_    /                    /\n                                      {  Fishes of low type;   \\                        \\\n      32-36 Fishes                    {    heterocercal; allied }  4 Old Red Sandstone   } 2nd month, that of a fish;\n                                      {    to crustacea        /                        /\n                                      {  Sauroid Fishes       \\\n      37 Batrachia (frogs, &c.)          Batrachia             \\\n                                                                }  5 Carboniferous\n      39 Sauria (lizards, &c.)           Sauria                /     formation\n      40 Chelonia (tortoises)            Chelonia             /                            3rd month, that of a turtle;\n      41-46 Birds                        _Footsteps of Birds_      6 New Red Sandstone     4th month, that of a bird;\n      47 Cetacea (dolphins, whales, &c.) _Bones of a            \\\n                                         Cetaceous Animal_       } 7 Oolite\n                                         _Bones of a Marsupial_ /\n                                                                   8 Chalk\n      48 Pachydermata (tapirs, &c.)      Pachydermata       \\\n      49 Edentata (sloths)               Edentata            \\\n      50 Rodentia (squirrels, hare, &c.) Rodentia             \\                            5th month, that of a rodent;\n      51 Marsupialia (opossums, &c.)     Marsupialia           \\\n      52 Ruminantia (oxen, stag, &c.)    Ruminantia             \\                          6th month, that of a ruminant;\n      53 Amphibia (seals)                                        } 9 Tertiary\n      54 Digitigrada (dog, cat, &c.)     Digitigrada            /                          7th month, that of a digitigrade animal;\n      55 Plantigrada (bear, &c.)         Plantigrada           /\n      56 Insectivora (shrew, &c.)        Insectivora          /\n      57 Cheiroptera (bats)              Cheiroptera         /\n      58 Quadrumana (apes)               Quadrumana         /                              8th month, that of the quadrumana;\n      29 Bimana (man)                    Bimana                   10 Superficial deposits  9th month, attains full human character.\n\n\n\nTRANSMUTATION OF SPECIES.\n\nIn the two last sections we have gone through the earth's geological\nhistory, first of the changes in its physical structure, next of the\nmutations in the organic forms that have, in serial order, appeared in\nthe successive strata of its external envelope, from the period of that\nfar distant crisis when it was a molten globe on which its primitive\ngranitic covering was just beginning to concrete, in consequence of\nabating heat, until we have arrived at the first prognostic signs of\napproaching human existence.\n\nThe rock upon rock of vast thickness, by which the earth's crust,\nthrough countless ages, has been formed, unquestionably constitutes a\nmost extraordinary phenomenon of physical creation, but hardly so\nmarvellous and incomprehensible as the beginning, progress, and end of\nthe divers orders of marine and terrestrial beings that filled each\nworld of life. It is to geologists, to PLAYFAIR, HUTTON, LYELL,\nBUCKLAND, SEDGWICK, OWEN, and other great names, native and foreign, to\nwhom we are indebted for this singular revelation of Nature's works. It\nis their unwearied research that has opened to us the surprising\nspectacle we have attempted briefly to describe of the diversified\ngroups of species which have, in the course of the earth's history,\nsucceeded each other at vast intervals of time; one set of animals and\nplants wholly or partly disappearing from the face of our planet, and\nothers, which apparently did not before exist, becoming the only or\npredominant occupants of the globe.\n\nNow the great question arises--whence, by what power, or by what law,\nwere these reiterated transitions brought about? Were the organized\nspecies of one geological epoch, by some long-continued agency of\nnatural causes, transmuted into other and succeeding species? or were\nthere an extinction of species, and a replacement of them by others,\nthrough special and miraculous acts of creation? or, lastly, did species\ngradually degenerate and die out from the influence of the altered and\nunfavourable physical conditions in which they were placed, and be\nsupplanted by immigrants of different species, and to which the new\nconditions were more congenial?\n\nThe last, we confess, is the view to which we are most inclined--first,\nbecause we think a transmutation of species, from a lower to a higher\ntype, has not been satisfactorily proved; and second, because of the\nstrong impression we entertain, that the universe, subject to certain\ncyclical and determinate mutations, was made complete at first, with\nself-subsisting provisions for its perpetual renewal and conservation.\nWe shall advert to this matter hereafter; but at present it is the\nconclusions of the author of the _Vestiges_ that claim consideration. He\nadopts the first interpretation of animal phenomena, namely, that there\nhas been a transmutation of species, that the scale of creation has been\ngradually advancing in virtue of an inherent and organic law of\ndevelopment. Nature, he contends, began humbly; her first works were of\nsimple form, which were gradually meliorated by circumstances favourable\nto improvement, and that everywhere animals and plants exhibit traces of\na parallel advance of the physical conditions and the organic structure.\nThe general principle, he inculcates, is, that each animal of a higher\nkind, in the progress of its embryo state, passes through states which\nare the final condition of the lower kind; that the higher kinds of\nanimals came later, and were developed from the lower kinds, which came\nearlier in the series of rock formations, by new peculiar conditions\noperating upon the embryo, and carrying it to a higher stage. These\nconclusions the author maintains geology has established, and of the\nresults thence derived he gives the subjoined recapitulation:--\n\n     \"In pursuing the progress of the development of both plants and\n     animals upon the globe, we have seen an advance in both cases, from\n     simple to higher forms of organization. In the botanical department\n     we have first sea, afterwards land plants; and amongst these the\n     simpler (cellular and cryptogamic) before the more complex. In the\n     department of zoology, we see, first, traces all but certain of\n     infusoria [shelled animalculae]; then polypiaria, crinoidea, and\n     some humble forms of the articulata and mollusca; afterwards higher\n     forms of the mollusca; and it appears that these existed for ages\n     before there were any higher types of being. The first step forward\n     gives fishes, the humblest class of the vertebrata; and, moreover,\n     the earliest fishes partake of the character of the lower\n     sub-kingdom, the articulata. Afterwards come land animals, of which\n     the first are reptiles, universally allowed to be the type next in\n     advance from fishes, and to be connected with these by the links of\n     an insensible gradation. From reptiles we advance to birds, and\n     thence to mammalia, which are commenced by marsupialia,\n     acknowledgedly low forms in their class. That there is thus a\n     progress of some kind, the most superficial glance at the\n     geological history is sufficient to convince us.\"\n\nNow this appears plausible and conclusive, but the correctness of the\nrecapitulation here made, and its conformity to actual nature, have been\nsharply disputed. It may be true that sea plants came first, but of this\nthere is no proof; and of land plants there is not a shadow of evidence\nthat the simpler forms came into being before the more complex: the\nsimple and complex forms are found together in the more ancient _flora_.\nIt is true that we first see polypiaria, crinoidea, articulata, and\nmollusca, but not exactly in the order stated by the author. It is true\nthat the next step gives us fishes, but it is not true that the earliest\nfishes link on to the lower sub-kingdom, the articulata. It is true that\nwe afterwards find reptiles, but those which first appear belong to the\nhighest order of the class, and show no links of an insensible gradation\ninto fishes. In the tertiary deposit of the London clay the evidence of\nconcatenation entirely fails. Among the millions of organic forms, from\ncorals up to mammalia of the London and Paris basins, hardly a single\nsecondary species is found. In the south of France it is said that two\nor three secondary species struggle into the tertiary strata; but they\nform a rare and evanescent exception to the general rule. Organic nature\nat this stage seems formed on a new pattern--plants as well as animals\nare changed. It might seem as if we had been transported to a new\nplanet; for neither in the arrangement of the genera and the species,\nnor in their affinities with the types of a pre-existing world, is there\nany approach to a connected chain of organic development.\n\nFor some discrepancies the author endeavours to account, and it is fair\nto give his explanation:--\n\n     \"Fossil history has no doubt still some obscure passages; and these\n     have been partially adverted to. Fuci, the earliest vegetable\n     fossils as yet detected, are not, it has been remarked, the lowest\n     forms of aquatic vegetation; neither are the plants of the\n     coal-measures the very lowest, though they are a low form, of land\n     vegetation. There is here in reality no difficulty of the least\n     importance. The humblest forms of marine and land vegetation are of\n     a consistence to forbid all expectation of their being preserved in\n     rocks. Had we possessed, contemporaneously with the fuci of the\n     Silurians, or the ferns of the carboniferous formation, fossils of\n     higher forms respectively, _equally unsubstantial_, but which had\n     survived all contingencies, then the absence of mean forms of\n     similar consistency might have been a stumbling-block in our\n     course; but no such phenomena are presented. The blanks in the\n     series are therefore no more than blanks; and when a candid mind\n     further considers that the botanical fossils actually present are\n     all in the order of their organic development, the whole phenomena\n     appear exactly what might have been anticipated. It is also\n     remarked, in objection, that the mollusca and articulata appear in\n     the same group of rocks (the slate system) with polypiaria,\n     crinoidea, and other specimens of the humblest sub-kingdom; some of\n     the mollusca, moreover, being cephalopods, which are the highest of\n     their division in point of organization. Perhaps, in strict fact,\n     the cephalopoda do not appear till a later time, that of the\n     Silurian rocks. But even though the cephalopoda could be shewn as\n     pervading all the lowest fossiliferous strata, what more would the\n     fact denote than that, in the first seas capable of sustaining any\n     kind of animal life, the creative energy advanced it, in the space\n     of one formation, (no one can say how long a time this might be,)\n     to the highest forms possible in that element, excepting such as\n     were of vertebrate structure. It may here be inquired if geologists\n     are entitled to set so high a value as they do upon the point in\n     the scale of organic life which is marked by the upper forms of the\n     mollusca. It will afterwards be seen that this is a low point\n     compared with the whole scale, if we are to take as a criterion\n     that parity of development which has been observed in the embryo of\n     one of the higher animals. _The human embryo passes through the\n     whole space representing the invertebrate animals in the first\n     month, a mere fraction of its course._ There is indeed a remarkably\n     rapid change of forms in such an embryo at first: the rapidity,\n     says Professor Owen, is 'in proportion to the proximity of the ovum\n     to the commencement of its development;' and, conformable to this\n     fact, we find the same zoologist stating that, in the lowest\n     division of the animal kingdom, (the Acrita of his arrangement,)\n     there is a much quicker advance of forms towards the next above it,\n     than is to be seen in subsequent departments. There is, indeed, to\n     the most ordinary observation, a rapidity and force in the\n     productive powers of the lowest animals, which might well suggest\n     an explanation of that rush of life which seems to be indicated in\n     the slate and Silurian rocks. With regard to the so-called early\n     occurrence of fishes partaking of the saurian character, I would\n     say that their occurrence a full formation after the earliest and\n     simplest fishes, is, considering how little we know of the space of\n     time represented by a formation, not early: their being later in\n     any degree is the fact mainly important. The subsequent rise of\n     new orders of fishes, fully piscine in character, may be explained\n     by the supposition of their having been developed, as is most\n     likely, from a different portion of the inferior sub-kingdom. In\n     short, all the objections which have been made to the great fact of\n     a general progress of organic development throughout the geological\n     ages, will be found, on close examination, to refer merely to\n     doubtful appearances of small moment, which vanish into nothing\n     when rightly understood.\"\n\nUpon some of the chief points here involved, it may be remarked that the\nmost eminent physiologists are not agreed; they are not agreed that\nanimals can be arranged in a series, passing from lower to higher; nor\nthat animals of a higher kind in the embryo state pass through the\nsuccessive stages of the lower kinds; the character of these stages, in\nthe asserted doctrine, being taken from the brain and heart, and man\nbeing the highest point of the series. There are physiologists too who\ndeny that the brain of the human embryo at any period, however early,\nresembles the brain of any mollusk or of any articulata. It never, they\nassert, passes through a stage comparable or analogous to a permanent\ncondition of the same organ in any invertebrate animal; and in like\nmanner the spinal cord in the human vertebrae at no period agrees with\nthe corresponding part of the lower kind of animals. The moment it\nbecomes visible in the human embryo, it is entirely dorsal in position;\nwhile in mollusks and articulatas a great part, or nearly the whole, is\nventral. The same is true of the heart, or centre of the vascular\nsystem, which has always a different relative position in the great\nnervous centre in the human embryo from what it has in any articulate\nanimal, and in most mollusks.\n\nA second position in the _Vestiges_ appears not to have been\nestablished--namely, as to the uniform geological arrangement of\ndifferent organic structures. It is not true that _only_ the lowest\nforms of animal life are found in the lowest fossiliferous rocks, and\nthat the more complicated structures are gradually and exclusively\ndeveloped among the higher bands in what might be called a natural\nascending scale. On the contrary, the predaceous cephalopods and the\nhighly organized crustaceous are among the oldest fossils. Such appears\nto be the order of nature as evidenced by facts, and it must be\nadmitted, however repugnant to preconceived notions or mere mortal\nconjectural amendments.\n\nIn the third place the evidence seems to preponderate in favour of\n_permanency of species_. There can be no doubt that both plants and\nanimals may, by the influence of breeding, and of external agents\noperating upon their constitution, be greatly modified, so as to give\nrise to varieties and races different from what before existed. But\nthere are limits to such modifications, as in the different kind and\nbreed of dogs; and no organized beings can, by the mere working of\nnatural causes, be made to pass from the type of one species to that of\nanother. A wolf by domestication, for example, can never become a dog,\nnor the ourang-outang by the force of external circumstances be brought\nwithin the circle of the human species.\n\nIn this opinion Mr. LYELL, Dr. PRICHARD, and Mr. LAWRENCE, concur. The\ngeneral conclusion at which they have arrived is, that there is a\ncapacity in all species to accommodate themselves to a certain extent to\na change of external circumstances; this extent varying greatly\naccording to the species. There may thus be changes of appearance or\nstructure, and some of these changes are transmissible to the offspring;\nbut the mutations thus superinduced are governed by certain laws, and\nconfined within certain limits. Indefinite divergence from the original\ntype is not possible, and the extreme limit of possible variation may\nusually be reached in a short period of time; in short, Professor\nWHEWELL concludes (_Indications of Creation_, p. 56), _that every\nspecies has a real existence in nature_, and a transmutation from one to\nanother does not exist. Thus for example, CUVIER remarks that,\nnotwithstanding all the differences of age, appearance and habits, which\nwe find in the dogs of various races and countries, and though we have\n(in the Egyptian mummies) skeletons of this animal as it existed 3,000\nyears ago, the relation of the bones to each other remains essentially\nthe same; and with all the varieties of their shape and size, there are\ncharacters which resist all the influences, both of external nature, of\nhuman intercourse, and of time.\n\nWhat varieties, again, in the forms of the different breeds of horses\nand horned cattle; racers, hunters, coach horses, dray horses, and\nponies; short-horns and long-horns, Devons and Herefords, polled\ngalloways and Shetlands; how unlike are the unimproved breeds of cattle\nas they existed a century ago before the march of agricultural\nimprovement began, and how different were most of these as then existing\nin what may be called the normal state from the wild cattle produced in\nChillington Park. It has been found, however, when external and\nartificial conditions are removed, and these different breeds are\nallowed to run wild, as in the Pampas and Australia, no matter what the\ndiversity of size, shape, and colour of the domestic breeds, they\nreverted in their wild state, in these respects, to their primitive\ntypes.\n\nSo again with regard to cultivated vegetables and flowers. How different\nare the species of the red cabbage and the cauliflower; who would have\nexpected them to be varieties of the wild _brassica oleracea_? Yet from\nthat they have been derived by cultivation. They have, however, a\ntendency like animals to revert to the original type, or, in the\ngardener's phrase, to degenerate, which it requires the utmost care on\nhis part to counteract. When left to a state of nature, they speedily\nlose their acquired forms, properties and character, and regain those of\nthe original species.\n\nIf species be permanent--if no education or training can educe new\nkinds--if the higher classes of animals are not the results of\nmeliorations of the lower--whence did they come? This question we are\nnot bound to answer. It might be as reasonably asked, whence did the\nlower classes come? Geology, like other sciences, does not conduct us to\nthe _beginning_, it only takes up creation at certain ulterior stages of\ndevelopment. The changes and construction of the globe may have been\ndifferent in different parts; it has not been proved that geological\nrevolutions have been either universal or contemporary. There may have\nbeen climates and regions adapted to the existence of the higher class\nof land animals, while contemporarily therewith other portions of the\nglobe might be undergoing changes beneath the ocean. It is not\nimprobable that the human species dwelt nearly stationary for ages on\nthe old continents of Africa and Asia, while Europe and America were\ncovered with water. Supposing these new continents formed, either by the\ngradual subsidence of the sea or the rising of its bed, successive\ninhabitants would follow in the order presented by existing organic\nremains. While covered by the sea, what now form Europe and America\ncould only be peopled by marine animals; but as the land rose or the\nwaters subsided into their ocean channels, and dry land appeared,\nreptiles and amphibiae might become the occupants; next, as the earth\nbecame drier and more salubrious, the new continent would be resorted to\nby terrestrial animals; in a still more advanced stage of purification\nand salubrity, man himself, as the lord of all the preceding classes of\nimmigrants, would take possession, and as he still continues the living\noccupant it is premature to look for his petrifaction.\n\n\nORIGIN OF THE ANIMATED TRIBES.\n\nScience has mastered many perplexities, but is almost powerless as ever\nin generation. All that lives, and still more all that moves, must have\na pre-existing germ formed independently of the created being, but which\nis essential to its existence, and fixes the type of organization. The\nold adage--_omne animal ab ovo_--may be taken as generally true. But\nthough every animal has its primordial egg or germ, all germs are not\nidentical. In the beginning of life there are other organic elements\nbesides the ovum. Partly on direct proof and partly on good analogy, it\nmay be inferred that these differ in different species--that each in the\nfirst stages of existence is bound by a different and immutable mode of\ndevelopment--and, if so, there can be no embryotic identity. \"By no\nchange of conditions,\" says Dr. CLARKE, \"can two ova of animals of the\nsame species be developed into different animal species; neither by any\nprovision of identical conditions can two ova of different species be\ndeveloped into animals of the same kind.\" If these views be right, and\nwe believe them to be so, there cannot be a transmutation of species\nunder the influence of external circumstances.\n\nBaffled in the effort either to create species or organically to change\nthem, attempts have been made to approach nearer to the source of\nvitality, and explain the chemical, electric, or mechanical laws by\nwhich the vital principle is influenced. For this purpose various\nhypotheses have been put forth; one is the noted conjecture of Lord\nMONBODDO, that man is only an advanced development of the chimpanzee or\nourang-outang. A second explanation is that given by LAMARCK, who\nsurmised, and with much ingenuity attempted to prove, that one being\nadvanced in the course of generations into another, in consequence\nmerely of the experience of wants calling for the exercise of faculties\nin a particular direction, by which exercise new developments of organs\ntook place, ending in variations sufficient to constitute new species.\nIn this way the swiftness of the antelope, the claws and teeth of the\nlion, the trunk of the elephant, the long neck of the giraffe have been\nproduced, it is supposed, by a certain plastic character in the\nconstruction of animals, operated upon for a long course of ages by the\nattempts which these animals make to attain objects which their previous\norganization did not place within their reach. This is what is meant by\nthe hypothesis of _progressive tendencies_, and which requires for its\nvalidity not only the assumption of a mere capacity for change, but of\nactive principles conducive to improvement and the attainment of higher\npowers and faculties. More recently ST. HILAIRE has published a paper in\nwhich he speaks of the immutability of species as a conviction that is\non the decline, and that the age of CUVIER is on the close. Carried away\nby what Professor PHILLIPS has called a poetical conjecture that cannot\nbe proved, this writer propounded the speculation that the present\ncrocodiles are really the offspring of crocodilian reptiles, the\ndifference being merely the effect of physical conditions, especially\noperating during long geological periods upon one original race. The\nhuman species, he contends, are but an advanced development of the\nhigher order of the monkey tribe, and that the negroes are degenerating\ntowards that type again. According to him the sivatherium--a fossil\nanimal that had been found in the Himalaya mountains--was the primeval\ntype that time had fined down into the giraffe from long-continued\nfeeding on the branches of trees. Dr. FALCONER and Capt. CAUTLEY,\nhowever, have shown that anatomical proofs are all against this\ninference, but if any doubt remained it must yield to the fact, that\namong the _fauna_ of the Sewalik hills the sivatherium and the giraffe\nwere contemporaries.\n\nThe author of the _Vestiges of Creation_ has put forth an hypothesis\nfounded on the preceding conjectures, but more compact and conclusive.\nHe is, as we have seen, in favour of the progressive change of species,\nadopting the notion that men once had tails, and that the rudiments of\nthis condal appendage are found in an undeveloped state in the _os\ncoccygis_ (p. 199.) His leading idea of the progress of organic life is\nthat the \"_simplest and most primitive type under a law to which that of\nlike production is subordinate, gave birth to the type next above it;\nthat this again produced the next higher, and so on to the very\nhighest_, the stages of advance being in all cases very small--namely,\nfrom one species only to another; so that the phenomenon has always been\nof a modest and simple character.\" (p. 231.) The arguments by which the\nauthor endeavours to prove his hypothesis may be thus compressed.\n\nAccording to him foetal development is a science, illustrated by\nHUNTER'S great collection of the Royal College of Surgeons, and\nestablished by the conclusions of ST. HILAIRE and TIEDMANN. Its primary\npositions are--1. That the embryos of all animals are not\ndistinguishably different from each other; and, 2. That those of all\nanimals pass through a series of phases of development, each of which is\nthe type or analogue of the permanent configuration of tribes inferior\nto it in the scale. Higher the order of animals, the more numerous its\nstages of progress. Man himself is not exempt from this law. His first\nfoetal form is that which is permanent in the animalcule; it next passes\nthrough ulterior stages, resembling successively a fish, a reptile, a\nbird, and the lower mammalia before it attains its specific maturity.\nThe period of gestation determines the species; protract it, and the\nspecies is advanced to a higher class. This might be done by the force\nof certain conditions operating upon the system of the mother. Give good\nconditions and the young she produces will improve in development; give\nbad conditions and it will recede. Cases of monstrous birth in the human\nspecies are appealed to, in which the most important organs are left\nimperfectly developed; the heart, for instance, having sometimes\nadvanced no further than the three-chambered or reptile form, while\nthere are instances of that organ being left in the two-chambered or\nfish-like form. These defects arise from a failure of the power of\ndevelopment in the mother, occasioned by misery or bad health, and they\nare but the converse of those conditions that carry on species to\nspecies. The _differences of sexes_ is the result of foetal progress\nonly one degree less marked than that of a change of species. Sex is\nfully ascertained to be a matter of development. All beings are at one\nstage of the embryotic progress _female_. A certain number of them are\nafterwards advanced to the more powerful sex. For proof of this, the\neconomy of bees is cited; when they wish to raise a queen-bee, or true\nfemale, they prepare for the larva a more commodious cell, and feed it\nwith delicate food. But we shall here stop to remark on the author's\nargument up to this point.\n\nIt is manifest, according to his hypothesis, that neither sex nor\nspecies depend on the ancestral germ, but simply on physical conditions\nand mechanical development. But eminent physiologists deny that the\nfacts are such as he has stated; they deny, as we have stated in a\nformer section, that the foetal progress is such as the _Vestiges_\nrepresent them to be; they deny that the human embryo, for example,\nexhibits in successive stages the form of fish, lizard, bird, beast: on\nthe contrary, they contend that it is only in the earliest period of the\norganic germ, when the manifestations are almost too obscure for\nmicroscopic sense, that any resemblance exists; that immediately the\norganic germ becomes sensible to observation, sex and species are found\nto be fixed. Take, for example, the vertebrata; in these, by some\nmysterious bond of union, the organic globules are seen to arrange\nthemselves into two nearly parallel rows. We may then say that the keel\nof the animal is laid down, and in it we have the first rudiments of a\nbackbone and a continuous spinal chord. But during the progress and\ncompletion of this first organic process no changes have been observed\nassimilating the nascent embryo to any of the inferior animals. The next\nseries of changes in the germinal membrane are of two kinds--in one the\nnervous system, the organs of motion, the intestinal canal, the heart\nand blood-vessels are manifested; the other set of changes, which are\nsubsequent, produce the perfection of the animal and determine its sex.\nAll these manifestations result from germinal appendages that cannot be\nsevered or changed without ruin to the embryo, and the conditions\nessential to life as the structure advances are due temperature, due\nnutriment of the nervous organs, and due access to the atmospheric air.\nWithout, therefore, pursuing further this part of the inquiry, we shall\nremark that the question at issue between the _Vestiges_ and its\nopponents is one of facts--of conflicting evidence--to be tried by the\njury of the public, or rather by those who, from science or professional\npursuits, are competent to form an authoritative opinion. Our own\nconclusion is, that in face of the testimony adduced against it, the\nauthor's hypothesis is not yet established.\n\nFor proof that species do change, and that even new species have been\nactually and recently produced, the author has adduced statements\ncertainly as questionable and little satisfactory as his representation\nof foetal phenomena. We can only briefly enumerate them. First we are\ntold that oats sown at midsummer, if kept cropped down, so as to be\nprevented shooting into ear, and then allowed to remain in the ground\nover winter, will spring up next year in the form of rye (p. 226). This\nneed not be disputed about; the experiment can be easily tried; but if\nrye were the result, it would be no conclusive proof of a translation of\nspecies. Perhaps the oat-plants perished under the operation of repeated\ncuttings, and the rye seed was dormant in the earth and sprung up in its\nplace; or, if not so, oats and rye may not be different species, only\nvarieties of the same species. They are scarcely more dissimilar than\nthe primrose, the cowslip, and the oxlip, which have all been raised\nfrom the seed of the same plant, and are now regarded by botanists as\nvarieties instead of species.\n\nWhen lime is laid on waste ground we are told that white clover will\nspring up spontaneously, and in situations where no clover-seed could\nhave been left dormant in the soil (p. 182). But how is this to be\nproved? It is certain that seeds will remain dormant in the soil for\ncenturies, and then spring up the first year the soil is turned up by\nthe plough. Some seeds have retained their vitality for thousands of\nyears in the old tombs of Egypt; they have been repeatedly brought to\nEngland, sown, and produced good wheat.\n\nWe are next told that wild pigs never have the measles, they are\nproduced by a _hyatid_ and the result of domestication; that a _tinea_\nis found in dressed wool that does not exist in its unwashed state; that\na certain insect disdains all food but chocolate, and that the larva of\n_oinopota cellaris_ only lives in wine and beer. All these are articles\nmanufactured by man, and are adduced as proofs of animal life,\nindependent of any primordial egg. The entoza are dwelt upon; they are\ncreatures living in the interior of other animals, of which the\ntape-worm that infests the human body is a melancholy instance. In\nthese illustrations we think the author has some show of reason, for we\nfeel convinced that there is such a thing as spontaneous generation from\nthe inorganic substance, wisely provided for clearing the earth of\nnoxious effluvia and putrid matter, and converting them into new\nelements conducive to health and life. We believe in this source of\nvitality from its wisdom and necessity, its necessity and wisdom, in our\nestimate, being strong presumptive proofs of its existence in harmony\nwith the general forecast and economy of nature. Of the self-originating\nspring of life, some of the examples adduced by the author are proofs,\nand of which we have familiar illustrations in cheese-mites, maggots in\ncarrion, and the green fly that breeds so profusely in weak and decaying\nvegetation; in all which by some inscrutable law the organic germ,\nwithout an antecedent, appears to evolve from the dead or putrifying\nmass for its riddance and transmutation.\n\nConceding, however, thus far to the author, we are not prepared to admit\nthat the creative powers of Messrs. CROSSE and WEEKES has been\nestablished. These gentlemen are said (p. 190) to have introduced a\nstranger in the animal kingdom, a species of _acarus_ or mite amidst a\nsolution of silica submitted to the electric current. The insects\nproduced by the action of a galvanic battery continued for eleven months\nare represented as minute and semi-transparent, and furnished with long\nbristles. One of the creatures resulting from this elaborate term of\ngestation was observed in the very act of emerging, in its first-born\nnudity, and sought concealment in a corner of the apparatus. Some of\nthem were observed to go back into the parent fluid and occasionally\nthey devoured each other; and soon after they were called to life, they\nwere disposed to multiply their species in the common way! So much for\nthe experiment; against its verity it is alleged, first, that the\n_Acarus Crossii_ are not a new species, or if new, that neither Mr.\nCROSSE nor Mr. WEEKES, who repeated Mr. CROSSE'S experiment, produced\nthem, but only aided by the voltaic battery the development of the\ninsects from their eggs. Such a mode of generation is contrary to all\nhuman experience, and can only be believed in on the strongest\ncorroborative proof.\n\nNeither by chemistry nor galvanism can man, we apprehend, be more than\ninstrumental and co-operative, not originally and independently\ncreative. In almost every form of life, whether animal or vegetable, art\ncan multiply varieties,--can train, direct--but cannot form new species.\nThis is the mockery of science. With all its invention and resource, it\ncannot produce organic originals. It can rear a crab-apple into a\ngolden-pippin, or wild sea-weed into a luxuriant cabbage; it can raise\ninfinite varieties of roses, tulips, and pansies, but can create no new\nplant, fruit, or flower. Man can make a steam-engine, or a watch, but he\ncannot make a fly, a midge, or blade of grass. He is an ingenious\ncompiler, but not a creator; and his powers of manufacture and\nconversion are restricted within narrow boundaries. He cannot wander far\nin the indulgence of his fancies without being recalled, and compelled\nto return to the first models set by the Great Architect. The further he\nstrays from primitive types in the effort to improve, by crossing,\ncutting, and grafting, and proportionably less becomes the procreative\nforce. Hybrids are notoriously sterile. Garden fruit is not permanent,\nand requires to be renewed from seed. The law seems universal in plants\nand animals, that the vital energy or germ is less forcible and prolific\nin the pampered and artificial, than in the natural and wild races.\n\n\nHYPOTHESIS OF THE VITAL PRINCIPLE.\n\nIt is ascertained that the basis of all vegetable and animal substances\nconsists in nucleated cells--that is, cells having granules within them.\nNutriment is converted into these before being assimilated by the\nsystem. It has likewise been noted that the globules of the blood are\nreproduced by the expansion of contained granules; \"they are, in short,\"\nsays the _Vestiges_, \"_distinct organisms multiplied by the same\nfissiporous generation_. So that all animated nature may be said to be\nbased on this mode of origin; _the fundamental form of organic being is\na globule, having a new globule forming within itself_, by which it is\nin time discharged, and which is again followed by another and another,\nin endless succession. It is of course obvious, that if these globules\ncould be produced by any process from inorganic elements, we should be\nentitled to say that the fact of a transit from the inorganic to the\norganic had been witnessed.\" (p. 176.) \"Globules,\" the author\ncontinues, \"can be produced in albumen by electricity. _If_, therefore,\nthese globules be identical with the cells which are now held to be\nreproductive, it _might_ be said that the production of albumen by\nartificial means is the only step in the process wanting. This has not\nyet been effected.\" (p. 177.)\n\nThese are the advances towards generation by chemistry and electricity.\nThe process, however, according to this detail, appears still far from\ncomplete. Albumen is to be produced \"by artificial means;\" and even then\nwe should doubt entire success. Chemists have long commanded the power\nto resolve the seeds of animal and vegetable life into their elements;\nthey have analysed them, and shown the exact weight and proportion of\neach constituent; but they never could put them together again, or, by\nany similar compound produce the primordial egg or organic germ, from\nwhich a living being would arise. A connecting link--a vital spark, or\nanimating soul--is always wanting to complete the existence of the\nPrometheus of the laboratory. Mark, too, the \"_if_,\" and the \"_might_,\"\nin this most lame and impotent hypothesis:--\"_If_, therefore, these\nglobules be identical with the cells which are held to be reproductive,\nit _might_ be said,\" &c. Globules can be easily produced; the passage of\nthe electric fluid through water will produce aerial globules in rapid\nand expansive movement; boys can produce them with suds and a\ntobacco-pipe in rapid succession, each, for aught we know, containing a\n\"granule\" that multiplies by \"fissiporous generation.\" But these are not\norganic globules, and the author has committed the great perversion in\nlanguage or logic of confounding the organic globule of life with the\ninorganic globule of a chemist. His theory is more fanciful than that of\nLAMARCK, from whom it is derived, and who had, at least, his _petit\ncorps gelatineux_ to begin with--to commence weaving organic tissue\nfrom--but our author's organic globule is not so substantive a\nconception; and as he does not pretend to be able to produce even this\nby physical means, he has not made a single step in generation.\n\nThis we consider the least satisfactory and successful portion of the\nauthor's work. It assigns no intelligible cause for the origin of\nlife--it only _begs the question_, by the substitution of one mystery\nfor another. His law of DEVELOPMENT is of the same description,--without\nsense or significancy, unsupported by applicable facts, and is not so\ncomprehensible a cause of vital changes as LAMARCK'S assigned\nprogressive tendencies of animals to master the appliances essential to\ntheir wants.\n\n\nANIMAL AFFINITIES, INSTINCT, AND REASON.\n\nThe scheme of the _Vestiges_ is uniformly and consistently worked out;\nall phenomena are resolved into gravitation and development--the first\nas the law of inorganic, the latter of organic matter. By the last,\nhowever, no new principle is revealed, only a new phrase devised, by the\namplified application of which the author's entire system may be said to\nbe _begged_ rather than proved; since development is used in a sense\nimplying an indefinite power of animate and inanimate creation; so that\nat last we make no new discovery, only grasp a new nomenclature.\n\nBut the author is always interesting, either by the novel display of\nfacts or the ingenious concatenation of plausibilities. Consistently\nwith his fundamental notion of animal transmutation, he tries to prove a\nfamily likeness or affinity from the humblest to the highest species. In\nthis way he seeks to explain the marvel with respect to the huge bulk of\nmany of the tertiary mammalia--the mammoth, mastadon, and megatherium;\nthey were in immediate descent from the cetacea, or whale and dolphin\ntribe. (p. 267.) Again, human reason is considered no exclusive gift; it\nexists subordinately in the instinct of brutes, and is alleged to be\nnothing more than a mode of operation peculiar to the faculties in a\nhumble state of endowment, or early stage of development. CUVIER and\nNEWTON are only intellectual expansions of a clown; and this notion is\nextended to moral obliquities, the wicked man being characterised as one\n\"whose highest moral feelings are rudimental.\" (p. 358.) From a like\nprinciple the writer concurs with Dr. PRICHARD, that mankind may have\nhad a common origin; that there exists no diversities of colour or\nosseous structure not referable to climatable or other plastic agencies\ninfluencing the development of the different races, commencing with the\nlowest, or Negro tribe, and ascending upward through the intermediate\naboriginal American, Mongolian, and Malay, to the last and most perfect\nstage of the Caucasian type.\n\nInto the verity of these conclusions we are not called upon to enter;\nthey have been long in controversy, involve a great array of facts and\ninductive inferences, and we have only referred to them as corollaries\nor collaterals of the author's hypothetical fabric.\n\n\nRELIGIOUS AND MORAL TENDENCIES.\n\nWe have no charge of impiety to bring against the _Vestiges_. Final\ncauses, or to express ourselves more intelligibly, a _purpose_ in\ncreation, is nowhere impugned. The Deity is not degraded by\nimpersonification in the form and frailties of mortality, but everywhere\nthe author reverently bows to that august and unsearchable name,\nacknowledges the grand and benevolent design--the admirable adaptation\nof every created thing to its end and place, and finally concludes in a\nstrain of grateful and exulting Optimism, that we confess we have not\nfully arrived at--namely, that everything \"is very good.\" (p. 387.) From\nthis impression we have only one constructive drawback to notice in the\nauthor's mechanical but fanciful constitution of the universe, by which\na special Providence in the government of the world seems to be\ndispensed with, and the Almighty is placed in the sinecure position of\nthe Grand Elector of the Abbe SIEYES, with nothing to do. But no divine\nattribute is abscinded--no glory of Omnipotence dimmed--whether it\npleases him to rule by direct interpositions of power, or his own\npre-ordained eternal laws.\n\nStill less can we detect in the speculative inquiries of the _Vestiges_\nconclusions hostile to the moral and social interests of the community.\nMen are formed to be what they are; vice and crime are the fruits of\nmalorganization, and malorganization is the result of the unfavourable\nconditions in which the subject of it has been placed, prior or\nsubsequent to birth. These are the author's leading metaphysical\ninculcations. They impose grave duties upon individuals and upon\nsociety, rightly understood and applied, but we cannot discern a hurtful\ntendency in them. They are useful knowledge, knowledge that it would be\nwell for parents and rulers to master, by showing the importance of\neducation, of favourable circumstances, and of good moral and physical\ntraining, for rearing happy, well-ordered, and virtuous members of the\ncommunity. Supreme in intelligence, man, we firmly believe, is not less\nsupremely blessed in the means of felicity, provided his real nature and\nposition in the scheme of creation were understood, recognised, and\ncarried out. He has his place, his office, and his destiny; he is no\nenigma but as an individual; \"in the mass,\" as the author emphatically\nremarks, \"he is a mathematical problem.\" His conduct is uniform and\nconsistent; the result of known and ascertainable causes--causes\ncalculable and predicable in their consequences, as the statistics of\ncrime have incontestibly established.\n\n\nGENERAL CONCLUSIONS ON THE VESTIGES.\n\nThe heavens are wonderful, and the earth is wonderful, and man, who, by\nforce of intellect, has sought to comprehend the immensity of one and\nunravel the formation of the other, is hardly less wonderful than\neither. Still the great mystery remains unriddled; our researches have\nbrought us no nearer the beginning, and the first cause of all continues\nunapproachable and undefinable as ever. Instead of explaining physical\ncreation, we begin with it; we take the existence of matter for granted,\nand its attributes for granted, and forthwith begin to fabricate a\nuniverse, without first ascertaining whence was matter, or whence the\nlaws by which it is impressed, and has been governed in its evolutions.\n\nNature's greatest phenomena are the celestial spaces and the bodies that\nfill them; our own planet and its living occupants. Upon each of these,\ntheir commencement and subsequent vicissitudes, the _Vestiges of\nCreation_ have propounded an hypothesis, but one mystery is only sought\nto be explained by another still more mysterious. For the fiat of a\nCreator chemical affinities and mechanical laws have been substituted,\nbut aided by these the author has failed to produce a world such as we\nfind it. Hence we are again driven upon the old tradition, the old\nsacred authority, that the world was created out of nothing; and this is\nas easy to comprehend as the solution of the _Vestiges_, that it sprang\nfrom that which is certainly next to nothing--a heated fog or universal\nfire-mist.\n\nWhen the author deals with the facts of science he interests and\ninstructs, but when he speculates he only amuses or perplexes, without\nadvancing knowledge. His terse and luminous description of the astral\nfirmament deeply impresses with the might and the magnitude of the vast\ndesign; but when he attempts to account for the elimination of suns and\nworlds, their formation and arrangement, we are struck by the puerile\nfolly of his conjectural presumptions.\n\nDescending from this august and glittering canopy to our own planet, we\nare not less astonished by the exhibition of the extraordinary\nrevolutions it has undergone. Geology is the true historian of the\nearth. Conducted by the lights it affords, we see an eternity of ages\nhas rolled before us; we discover a series of worlds rising through the\ndepths of ocean from the central sphere of heat, amidst boiling floods\nand volcanic fires, each new platform of existence, that countless\nperiods of time had been requisite to form, peopled with its own\ncongenial forms of organic life, mostly commencing with the simpler, and\nascending by almost imperceptible gradations to the higher and more\ncomplex structures of being. We are struck by the correspondence, by the\n_pari passu_ development and formation of the earth's crust and organic\nexistences, and we are apt hastily to conclude that a relation has\nsubsisted between them, that contemporary changes have been cause and\neffect, and that the improvement of the earth produced the correlative\nimprovement in animals and plants.\n\nThis forms the author's second questionable hypothesis; it is plausible,\nbut false--repugnant to fact and correct observation. We have no\ncredible evidence that species have changed, or are changeable by the\nutmost efforts of art or favouring conditions; all we can effect is to\nimprove them within definite limits, but not alter their characteristic\ntypes; and we have certain proof that neither man nor the animal nearly\nnext to him in organization, has changed either in habits, disposition,\nform, or osseus structure during the last 3,000 years. Resemblance is no\nproof of identity; and hence, though species run into each other by\nalmost inappreciable shades of difference, it is no proof that they are\nderivative, or other than isolated and self-dependent creations. That\nthey are such, and shall continue such, seems a fixed canon of Nature,\nwho, apparently, has prescribed to each its circle of amendment and\nrange, that like shall beget like--that nought organic shall exist\nwithout ancestral germ--and that the variety of species which\nconstitutes the beauty and order of nature shall by no chance,\ncontrivance, or mingling of races, be confounded.\n\nGeological facts are in favour of this conclusion. They attest the\nappearance of new species, not their improvement. In each species a\ngradation of improvement, approximating from a lower to the next higher\norganism, is not perceptible; but each seems to have been made perfect\nat first, and most suited to the co-existent state of the earth. The\nearliest reptiles were not reptiles of inferior structure; nor the\nearliest fishes, birds, or beasts. They were adapted, as we now find\nthem, to their precise sphere of existence, without progressive\naptitude, preparatory to a higher and translated condition of being.\nGeology rather points to the extinction and degeneracy of species than\ntheir improvement; and the fossils of the old red sandstone, and of the\ncarboniferous formation, attest a loftier and more magnificent creation\nof both marine and land products than any now subsisting.\n\nFor these and other reasons before adduced, we dismiss the hypothesis of\nanimal transmutation as unproved and untenable. It pleases and satisfies\nsuperficial views, but confronted with the facts of nature, it vanishes\nlike a baseless vision. Man is _sui generis_, sole and exclusive in\norganization, without pre-existing type or affinity to other species;\nand his alleged recent metamorphosis from a monkey, and his first and\nfar more distant one from a snail or a tadpole, are paradoxes only\nworthy of idle debating clubs.\n\nHaving attempted to unfold the progression of species by his law of\ndevelopment, the author next essays to explain the commencement of the\nvital principle itself. But here, too, he must have a beginning, and his\n\"organic globule\" answers a similar purpose, in deducing the mystery of\nlife, as his nuclei in the \"nebular hypothesis.\" In both the perplexity\nand real difficulty is not solved or mastered, but evaded. But we have\nalready remarked on the point, and shall only observe that when the\nauthor can elicit _thought_ from inorganic matter, either by chemistry\nor galvanism, we shall think he has made a step in creation. Until then\nhe does not advance, only deceives himself and readers by verbal\nsubtleties and baseless suppositions.\n\nApart from its hypotheses, the _Vestiges_ form a valuable and\ninteresting work. It is the most complete, elaborate, and--with all its\nfaults of detail, logic, and inference--the most scientific expositor of\nuniversal nature yet offered to the world. But its hypotheses are\nunwarranted, not inductively derived, and can have no hold on men of\nscience, supported as they mostly are by fanciful analogies, facts\nmisunderstood or misstated, and illustrations selected without\ndiscrimination or applicability. Theories do sometimes conduce to the\ndiscovery of truth, but are often obstructive; occupy the mind, like\ntheological controversy, without advancing science; and are viewed with\nthe same aversion by the philosopher that the political abstractions\ntendered to the multitude by the demagogue are viewed by the patriotic\nlegislator.\n\nThe work, however, will live, and deserves to live. The temple of nature\nhas been looked into, not profoundly, perhaps, nor always successfully;\nbut in a fearless spirit, and with a highly-accomplished mind. Had the\ndivine COSMOS been more fully dwelt upon and depicted--had the harmony,\nbeauty, and beneficence of creation been more fully and exclusively\ndisplayed--we should have been more gratified; but we are thankful, in\nthe main, for what we have received. An impulse has been given to\npopular inquiry, and a vast field for discussion opened, from which we\ncan prospectively discern neither less love for man, nor reverence for\nGod.\n\nWho the author is we have no certain knowledge. It is not, we suspect,\nLord KING, nor Lord THURLOW, nor Lady BYRON; but it may be the author of\nthe _Essay on the Formation of Opinions_, and of the _Principle of\nRepresentation_. Mr. BAILEY, of Sheffield, though little known,\npossesses the fine reasoning powers, intellectual grasp, independence of\nresearch, abstract analysis, and attic style, that would qualify him to\nproduce the _Vestiges of Creation_, though we never heard that he is a\ngreat natural philosopher. But, as just hinted, deep science is not\nevinced by the _Vestiges_, only an able, systematic, and tasteful\narrangement of its distant and recent advances.\n\n\n\n\n\"EXPLANATIONS:\"\n\nA SEQUEL TO THE\n\n\"VESTIGES OF THE NATURAL HISTORY OF CREATION.\"\n\n(_From the_ ATLAS _of December 20, 1845._)\n\n\nSo many strong objections had been arrayed against the _Vestiges of\nCreation_, that the author was called upon to elucidate and reinforce\nhis argument, or abandon the ground he had taken up. The more candid and\nequitable of his judges--those who were disposed to try him upon the\nmerits, and independently test the claims of his inquiry, as in fairness\nit ought to be, as strictly a scientific speculation, regardless of any\nconstructive bearings it might have on current opinions or\nprejudices--could not arrive at any more favourable conclusion than that\nhe had failed to establish his hypotheses. Indeed this was the only\nverdict that could be safely delivered in. The impugners of the work\nwere in the same helpless predicament as its author, who had, however,\nmore venturously presumed to unravel unsearchable mysteries, concerning\nwhich, in the existing state of science, men can only conjecture,\nwonder, and adore, utterly unable to affirm or deny aught respecting\nthem. What, for instance, with the remotest semblance of certainty, can\nbe predicated of the stellar orbs? Is it not idle almost to speculate on\nthe impenetrable secret of their origin when their very existence is\nundefinable--when their end, their glittering discs, and all but\nimmeasurable distances are wholly unapproachable? Nor hardly less beyond\nour grasp is the commencement of organic existences. We do pride\nourselves on recent advances to the sources of entity; we tear up the\ndead, we torture the living, and sedulously chronicle every beat of the\nheart and vibration of the brain to slake an insatiable curiosity, yet\nhow unsatisfactory our reach towards the hidden springs of life--how\nlimited our attainments, when the creation of a single blade of grass,\nthe humblest worm, a poor beetle, or gadfly, would baffle the utmost\nstructural skill of the greatest philosopher! Into the fathomless depths\nof our own globe we have also essayed to penetrate. Poor beings! of\nthree score and ten, whose utmost historical span extends only to some\nthousands of years, have sought to trammel up the terrene vicissitudes\nof millions of ages anterior to their own existence! Does not this\nsavour of a vain research, or of a laudable thirst for knowledge?\n\nOver all these dark and solemn inscrutabilities, however, the _Vestiges_\nundertook to throw a glare of light, to reveal their beginning,\nprogression, order, relations, and law of development. Although daring\nin aim, the attempt was not to be wholly deprecated. While religious\nfreedom had been secured, philosophy had become timid, official, and\ntimeserving; retentive as FONTENELLE of the truths within its grasp, and\nfearful to give utterance to aught that might disturb the stillness of\nthe temple, the lecture-room, or fashionable auditory. Modern teachers\nhad been used so long to the Baconian go-cart, that they had become as\napprehensive of losing the inductive clue as the PALINURUSES of old of\nthe sight of the directing shore. But the time had arrived when it\nseemed expedient to relax the strictness of the investigative rule, and\nafford scope for a more systematic, if not speculative research. Science\nhad made great acquisitions, and it seemed desirable, if only for\nexperiment sake, to see what kind of FRANKENSTEIN would result from the\narchitectural union of her scattered limbs. This formed the scope of the\n_Vestiges of Creation_; novelties were not propounded, only a portentous\nskeleton raised from the truths physical astronomy, geology, chemistry,\nphysiology, and natural history had established. Does the author recoil\nfrom his work? No; these _Explanations_ attest that he is steadfast in\nthe worship of the idol of his brain. He retracts nothing, he\nre-asserts, elucidates, and often dexterously turns the weapons of the\nmost formidable and orthodox of his adversaries against them, by showing\nfrom their writings that they had, in detail at least, acquiesced in\nthe truths that they now, in a generalised form, seek to controvert and\nrepudiate. So much adroitness and pertinacity in the author can hardly\nfail to provoke resistance, if not asperity, despite of the\nimperturbable temper in which he maintains the combat. The learned have\nbeen disturbed in their daily routine, by the discharge from an unknown\nhand, of a massive pyrites, that has diffused as much consternation\namong the herd of modish elocutionists, college tutors, and chimpanzee\nprofessors, as Jove's ligneous projectile among the lieges of the\nstanding pool. For this commotion we have, on a former occasion,\nconceded that there existed valid reasons, and we hasten to see the way\nin which they have been met in the rejoinder before us; contenting\nourselves, as we needs must, by briefly noticing some of the salient\npoints of the controversy.\n\nFirst of the Nebular Hypothesis. The chief objection to this theory is,\nthat the existence of nebulous matter in the heavens is disproved by the\ndiscoveries made by the telescope of the Earl of ROSSE. By the reach of\nthis wondrous tube, masses of light, rendered apparently nebulous by\ntheir vast distance, have been resolved into clusters of stars, and\nthence the assumption seemed unwarrantable that any luminous matter,\ndifferent from the solid bodies composing planetary systems existed in\nthe heavenly spaces. But to this the author replies, that there are two\nclasses of nebulae--one resolvable into constellations--another\ncomparatively near, that remains unaffected by telescopic power, and\nthat until this last description can be separated, the nebular\nhypothesis is not disproved. It is thus brought to an issue of facts,\nboth as to the existence of nebulae of this latter kind, and the optical\npower to resolve them into distinct stars.\n\nBut the author can hardly claim this negative success in grappling with\na second objection--namely, his assumed origin of _rotatory motion_.\nAccording to him, a confluence of atoms round a spherical centre of\nattraction, would cause the agglomerated mass to revolve upon its axis\nin the manner of our earth. This was denied by everybody the least\nacquainted with the laws of motion; and thus did one of his imaginary\nsolutions of a great phenomenon of the universe fall dead to the ground.\nThis he now seems to concede, but in a sentence unintelligible to us,\nin which an undoubted physical law is spoken of as only an _abstract\ntruth_ (p. 20). He obviously still clings to his first mistaken\ninference, and calls to his aid Professor NICHOL, whom he has also\npressed into his service to help him over the last-mentioned difficulty\nby the Professor's affirmation of a diversity of nebulous clusters. But\nthe Professor does not commit himself to the extent of the author; his\naqueous whirlpool is cited from HERSCHEL, only in illustration, and\ncorrectly said to be produced by the unequal force of convergence of a\nfluid to a common centre. But the author's nuclei, disposed in his\nnotable \"fire-mist,\" did not act with unequal force on the ambient\nvapour, and whose central convergence in consequence, would not produce\nrotation or motion of any kind. This was the real matter in question,\nthe author was taken up on his own premises, and the results he assumed\nto follow from them proved to be inconsistent with the unquestionable\nlaws of gravitating matter.\n\nHe has gone over the geological portion of his subject with much care,\nbut if competent, it would be impossible within our narrow limits to\naccompany him; nor could the discussion be made either interesting or\nintelligible except to the scientific, who have devoted attention to an\nextremely curious, but still obscure and unsettled field of\ninvestigation. He has elaborately cleared up many points, and\nsuccessfully, we think, answered some weighty objections, but we are not\nyet converts to his theory of organic development. One passage we shall\nextract; after adverting to the facts established by powerful evidence,\nthat during the long term of the earth's existence, strata of various\nthickness were deposited in seas composed of matter worn away from the\nprevious rocks; that these strata by volcanic agency were raised into\ncontinents, or projected into mountain chains, and that sea and land\nhave been constantly interchanging conditions. He continues:--\n\n     \"The remains and traces of plants and animals found in the\n     succession of strata show that, while these operations were going\n     on, the earth gradually became the theatre of organic being, simple\n     forms appearing first, and more complicated afterwards. _A time\n     when there was no life_ is first seen. We then _see life begin, and\n     go on_; but whole ages elapsed before man came to crown the work of\n     nature. This is a wonderful revelation to have come upon the men of\n     our time, and one which the philosophers of the days of Newton\n     could never have expected to be vouchsafed. The great fact\n     established by it is, that the organic creation, as we now see it,\n     was not placed upon the earth at once; it observed a PROGRESS. Now\n     we can _imagine_ the Deity calling a young plant or animal into\n     existence instantaneously; but we see that he does not usually do\n     so. The young plant and also the young animal go through a series\n     of conditions, advancing them from a mere germ to the fully\n     developed repetition of the respective parental forms. So, also, we\n     can _imagine_ Divine power evoking a whole creation into being by\n     one word; but we find that such had not been his mode of working in\n     that instance, for geology fully proves that organic creation\n     passed through a series of stages before the highest vegetable and\n     animal forms appeared. Here we have the first hint of organic\n     creation having arisen in the manner of natural order. The analogy\n     does not prove identity of causes, but it surely points very\n     broadly to natural order or law having been the mode of procedure\n     in both instances.\"\n\nTo the allusion in the last sentence there can be no demur; that\nthere is \"natural order or law\" in creation who will contest? But it\nis the author's law and the author's order that are in dispute--his\ntransmutation of species, the higher classes emerging from and\npartly annihilating the lower, under meliorated conditions of being.\nThat the simpler form of organic life should first appear; that\nremains of invertebrated animals should be first found; then, with\nthese, fish, being the lowest of the vertebrated; next, reptiles and\nbirds, which occupy higher grades; and finally, along with the rest,\nmammifers, the highest of all--all this appears natural enough. _How\ncould it be otherwise?_ When the earth was a slimy bed, what but the\nlowest forms of life--the mollusca, and other soft animals, without\nbony structure--could possibly live in or occupy it? During the\ncarboniferous era, when the earth was enveloped in an atmosphere of\nhydrogen, vegetation might thrive; but man, and animals like\nhim, dependent on vital air, could not exist; nor are remains of\nthem found in this epoch of the globe's vicissitudes. All this\nis comprehensible. But the perplexing inquiry is, whence did\nthe successive grades of animals emerge? That they could not\ncontemporaneously exist; when the whole earth was a shoreless sea,\nand that animals could not live is certain; but were they created in\nsuccession by the Divine fiat, or did they emerge, as our author\nsupposes and elaborately tries to prove, from the humblest primitive\nforms, by an inscrutable law of progression--evidenced, he contends,\nby geological facts--though by some his facts are disputed--and\ncertainly not confirmed by any animal changes observable within the\nlimits of human experience?\n\nThere is another alternative offers, which would dispense both with the\nauthor's hypothesis and the need of successive organic creations by a\nspecial Providence. Is it a geological fact, since life began, that the\nearth has _simultaneously_ undergone throughout its entire surface the\nrevolutions assigned to it? May it not always, from that period, have\nconsisted, as it now does, of water and dry land, alternately changing\ntheir sites, but always apart, and allowing of the contemporary\nexistence on some portion of its surface of all the varieties of tribes\never found upon it? The fossiliferous rocks that formed the primeval\nsea-beds could only be deposited by the abrasion from the anterior and\nhigher rocks. It has always appeared to us that this conjecture is\nworthy of consideration, and, if found tenable, would reconcile many\nperplexities.\n\nUpon subjects so obscure, and to which the human intellect has been only\nrecently directed, it is not surprising that men of science have not\narrived at uniformity of conclusion. Unable to reconcile phenomena with\npositive knowledge, there are names of no mean repute who would reserve\ncertain domains of creation as the fields of special interventions. To\nthis class Dr. WHEWELL appears to belong, who assumes that \"events not\nincluded in the _course of nature_ have formerly taken place.\" In the\nsame way Professor SEDGWICK, to account for the appearance of certain\nanimals, says, \"They were not called into being by any law of nature,\nbut by a power above nature.\" He adds, \"they were created by the hand of\nGOD, and adapted to the conditions of the period.\" To this the author of\nthe _Vestiges_ assents, with the explanation (p. 134) that their\nexistence was not the result of a \"special exertion of power to meet\nspecial conditions,\" but of an antecedent and primitive law of\ndevelopment suited to the new exigencies, and emanating from the\nCreator. This, he contends, does not lower our estimate of the Divine\ncharacter; and, in proof, cites Dr. DODDRIDGE, who cannot be suspected\nof irreverence. \"When we assert,\" says the pious and amiable author, \"a\nperpetual Divine agency, we readily acknowledge that matters are so\ncontrived as not to need a Divine interposition in a different manner\nfrom that in which it had been constantly exerted. And it must be\nevident that an unremitting energy, displayed in such circumstances,\n_greatly exalts our idea of God, instead of depressing it_; and,\ntherefore, by the way, is so much more likely to be true.\" Against\nconstructive inferences it is urged, in the _Explanations_--\n\n     \"As to results which may flow from any particular view which reason\n     may show as the best supported, I must firmly protest against any\n     assumed title in an opponent to pronounce what these are. The first\n     object is to ascertain truth. No truth can be derogatory to the\n     presumed fountain of all truth. The derogation must lie in the\n     erroneous construction which a weak human creature puts upon the\n     truth. And practically it is the true infidel state of mind which\n     prompts apprehension regarding any fact of nature, or any\n     conclusion of sound argument.\"\n\nThe writer then quotes Sir JOHN HERSCHELL as having some years ago\nannounced views strictly conformable to those subsequently taken of\norganic creation in the _Vestiges_:--\n\n     \"'For my part,' says Sir John, 'I cannot but think it an inadequate\n     conception of the Creator, to assume it as granted that his\n     combinations are exhausted upon any one of the theatres of their\n     former exercise, though, in this, as in all his other works, we are\n     led, by _all analogy_, to suppose that he operates through a series\n     of intermediate causes, and that, in consequence, _the origination\n     of fresh species, could it ever come under our cognizance, would be\n     found to be a natural, in contradistinction to a miraculous\n     process_,--although we perceive no indications of any process\n     actually in progress which is likely to issue in such a result. In\n     his address to the British Association at Cambridge, (1845), he\n     said with respect to the author's hypothesis of the first step of\n     organic creation--'The transition from an inanimate crystal to a\n     globule capable of such endless organic and intellectual\n     development, is as great a step--as unexplained a one--as\n     unintelligible to us--and in any sense of the word as _miraculous_,\n     as the immediate creation and introduction upon earth, of every\n     species and every individual would be!'\"\n\nThe Rev. Dr. PYE SMITH is next adduced:--\n\n     \"'Our most deeply investigated views of the Divine Government,'\n     says he, 'lead to the conviction that it is exercised in the way of\n     _order_, or what we usually call _law_. God reigns according to\n     immutable principles, that is _by law_, in _every part of his\n     kingdom--the mechanical, the intellectual, and the moral_; and it\n     appears to be most clearly a position arising out of that fact,\n     that _a comprehensive germ which shall necessarily evolve all\n     future developments_, down to the minutest atomic movements, is a\n     more suitable attribution to the Deity, than the idea of a\n     necessity for irregular interferences.'\"\n\nLastly, the reviewer of the _Vestiges_ in _Blackwood's Magazine_, who is\nunderstood to be a naturalist of distinguished ability, expresses\nhimself in an equally decided manner:--\n\n     \"To reduce to a system the acts of creation, or the development of\n     the several forms of animal life, no more impeaches the authorship\n     of creation, than to trace the laws by which the world is upheld,\n     and its phenomena perpetually renewed. The presumption naturally\n     rises in the mind, that the same Great Being would adopt the same\n     mode of action in both cases.... To a mind accustomed, as is every\n     educated mind, to regard the operations of Deity as essentially\n     differing from the limited, sudden, evanescent impulses of a human\n     agent, it is distressing to be compelled to picture to itself, the\n     power of God as put forth _in any other manner than in those slow,\n     mysterious, universal laws, which have so plainly an eternity to\n     work in;_ it pains the imagination to be obliged to assimilate\n     those operations, for a moment, to the brief energy of a human\n     will, or the manipulations of a human hand.... No, there is nothing\n     atheistic, nothing irreligious, in the attempt to conceive\n     creation, as well as reproduction, carried on by universal laws.\"\n\nWe have dwelt so much upon this matter because it is one in which\npopular feelings are likely to be most deeply interested. We shall give\nthe author, too, the benefit of his _Explanations_ on another point,\nelucidating his former statement of the transmutation of a crop of oats\ninto a crop of rye:--\n\n     \"'At the request,' says Dr. Lindley, 'of the Marquis of Bristol,\n     the Reverend Lord Arthur Hervey, in the year 1843, sowed a handful\n     of oats, treated them in the manner recommended, by continually\n     stopping the flowering stems, and the produce, in 1844, has been\n     for the most part ears of a very slender barley, having much the\n     appearance of rye, with a little wheat, and some oats; samples of\n     which are, by the favour of Lord Bristol, now before us.' The\n     learned writer then adverts to the 'extraordinary, but certain\n     fact, that in orchidaceous plants, forms just as different as\n     wheat, barley, rye, and oats, have been proved by the most rigorous\n     evidence, to be accidental variations of one common form, brought\n     about no one knows how, but before our eyes, and rendered\n     permanent by equally mysterious agency. Then says Reason, if they\n     occur in orchidaceous plants, why should they not also occur in\n     corn plants? for it is not likely that such vagaries will be\n     confined to one little group in the vegetable kingdom; it is more\n     rational to believe them to be a part of the _general system_ of\n     creation.... How can we be _sure_, that wheat, rye, oats, and\n     barley, are not all accidental off-sets from some unsuspected\n     species?'\"\n\nIt may be so; but this would only prove that the \"unsuspected species\"\nincluded greater varieties, not that a really defined species was\ntransmutable into another. But it is a point upon which no satisfactory\nresult can be arrived at, since naturalists are not agreed in the\nclassification of species, nor what attributes constitute one.\n\nThe Broomfield experiment is again brought forward, as decisive of the\npower to originate new life from inorganic elements. It will be\nremembered that Mr. WEEKES, of Sandwich, continued during three years to\nsubject solutions to electric action, and invariably found insects\nproduced in these instances, while they as invariably failed to appear\nwhere the electric action was not employed, but every other condition\nfulfilled. In a letter to the author of the _Vestiges_--two are\ninserted, one on the independent generation of fungi--Mr. WEEKES says--\n\n     \"One hundred and sixty-six days from the commencement of the\n     experiment--the first acari seen in connexion therewith, six in\n     number and nearly full-grown, were discovered on the outside of the\n     open glass vessel. On removing two pieces of card which had been\n     laid over the mouth of this vessel, several fine specimens were\n     found inhabiting the under surfaces, and others completely\n     developed and in active motion here and there within the glass.\n     Making my visit at an hour when a more favourable light entered the\n     room, swarms of acari were found on the cards, about the glass\n     tumbler, both within and without, and also on the platform of the\n     apparatus. At this identical hour Dr. J. Black favoured me with a\n     call, inspected the arrangements, and received six living specimens\n     of the acarus produced from solution in the open vessel.\"\n\nSpecimens of the insect were sent to Paris, when they set a whole\nconclave of philosophers a-laughing, because they were found to contain\nova. Other specimens were sent to London, but there their fate was\nsealed by their being found to be, not a new species, but one then\nabundant in the country. For ourselves we think the experiment not\nconclusive. We adopt HUME'S principle. All but universal experience\nhaving established that life is _ex ovo_ only, we must have a\nproportionate body of counter evidence to establish a different mode of\ngeneration. At all events, Mr. WEEKES'S protracted gestation of 166 days\nby his galvanic battery is not likely, in the existing rage for\ndespatch, to supersede the existing routine of reproduction.\n\n\nLONDON: PRINTED BY C. WHITING, BEAUFORT HOUSE, STRAND.\n\n\n\n\nTHE ATLAS,\n\nA General Family Newspaper and Journal of Literature.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nThis Periodical, which may be justly called a Weekly Cyclopaedia of\nPolitics, Literature, Arts, and Science, is published every Saturday\nafternoon, in time for the post, containing the News of Saturday.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTHE ATLAS\n\nIS DIVIDED INTO TWO PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENTS,\n\nNEWS AND LITERATURE,\n\nAnd these are subdivided and classified with care and industry into\nheads of easy reference, so that each particular subject is preserved\ndistinct and entire. The dimensions of the sheet, which folds into\nsixteen large quarto-sized pages, containing forty-eight columns, afford\nthis classification facilities which few other publications possess.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nNEWS.\n\nPARLIAMENTARY DEBATES reported on a scale of magnitude far exceeding\nother weekly Journals.\n\nPARLIAMENTARY PAPERS, a digest of all Parliamentary documents of obvious\nreference and popular utility.\n\nFOREIGN NEWS, the current events in foreign countries, arranged in the\nform of historical narrative, collated carefully from contemporary\nauthorities, and distributed under the heads of the different countries\nand colonies to which they belong.\n\nBRITISH NEWS, a clear epitome of all domestic occurrences, under the\nvarious heads of Public Meetings, Trade, Agriculture, Accidents and\nOffences, Police, Proceedings of the Courts of Law and Sessions, Court\nand Fashionable News, Church and University Intelligence, Military and\nNaval Affairs copiously given, the Money Market, and the miscellaneous\nnews of the week up to midnight on Saturday. The Local News of Ireland\nand Scotland, under separate heads. In the conduct of this department of\nthe ATLAS recourse is had to many exclusive sources of information, and\ncorrespondents have been established who furnish expressly the latest\nintelligence. The Gazettes and Tables of Markets, and all matters\ninteresting to the Commercial World, are especially attended to.\nPreserving an independence in its editorial capacity, the ATLAS affords\na faithful reflection of the opinions and proceedings of all political\nparties.\n\nThe attention that is observed in the purity of language and selection\nof subjects, down to the minutest paragraph in the ATLAS, recommends it\nespecially to the use of families and the guardians of youth; and the\ncopious details it affords of Military and Naval Affairs, invest it with\nvaluable attractions for the members of these professions, and the\nresidents in the Colonies.\n\n\nLITERATURE.\n\nThe Contributions to this department are from the pens of Professors and\nGentlemen of acknowledged reputation, and are classified under the\nfollowing heads:--\n\n1.--ORIGINAL ESSAYS ON MEN AND THINGS, embodying a lively commentary on\npassing events and men and manners.\n\n2.--THEATRICAL CRITICISMS upon the written and acted Drama, in which\nboth are reviewed in a spirit of truth and perfect candour.\n\n3.--REVIEWS of all new works of ability, with numerous extracts.\nIndependent and free from all literary and personal prejudices, the\nopinions of the Reviewers in the ATLAS may be consulted with confidence\nin their integrity.\n\n4.--LITERARY MEMORANDA, notes of all novelties in literature abroad and\nat home, and summary criticisms on all works of minor importance.\n\n5.--MUSIC AND MUSICIANS, or scientific criticisms on vocal and\ninstrumental performers, operas, and new music, on the Continent as well\nas in England, with occasional engraved illustrations.\n\n6.--FINE ARTS, Weekly notices of pictorial exhibitions, and critical\ndescriptions of paintings, drawings, and engravings, with commentaries\non all new works of art.\n\n7.--SCIENTIFIC NOTICES, or descriptions of improvements in Mechanics and\nthe experimental Sciences, illustrated occasionally by diagrams, with an\naccount of New Patents, Meteorological Tables, Proceedings of Literary\nand Scientific Institutions, &c.\n\nThe Literary division of the ATLAS in the various branches has formed an\nera in the class of publications in which it ranks; and exhibits a\nremarkable union of the essential features of the more elaborate\nReviews, with the popular and practical objects of the General\nNewspaper.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nPublished for the Proprietor, at the office, 6, Southampton-street,\nStrand, London.--Price Eight Pence. Orders received by all Newsmen\nthroughout the Kingdom.\n\n\n\n\n_In one volume octavo, cloth lettered, price Five Shillings,_\n\nNATIONAL DISTRESS,\n\nITS CAUSES AND REMEDIES;\n\nA Prize Essay\n\nAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN \"THE ATLAS.\"\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nBy SAMUEL LAING, Esq., Jun.,\n\n_Late Fellow of St. John's, Cambridge._\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nPART I.\n\nChap. I.--General Considerations--Absence of the usual Historical\nSymptoms of National Decline--Definition of the Evils which Threaten\nSociety.\n\nChap. II.--Official Pauperism and Unrecognised Destitution--Evidence\nrespecting the Condition of the Lower Classes in Large Towns.\n\nChap. III.--Extent of Destitution in Large Towns--Condition of Hand-loom\nWeavers and other Classes of Unskilled Manufacturing Operatives.\n\nChap. IV.--Condition of Class of Agricultural Labourers.\n\nChap. V.--Condition of Classes of Labouring Population employed in\nMines, Fisheries, Canals, Railways, &c.\n\nChap. VI.--Condition of Classes Superior to Common Labourers--General\nView of Society in Great Britain.\n\n\nPART II.\n\nChap. I.--General Views--Modern Theories of Society--Effect and\nParamount Importance of Moral Causes.\n\nChap. II.--Economical Causes--Population--Theory of Malthus.\n\nChap. III.--Economical Causes, continued--Revolution in the Course of\nIndustry effected by Machinery--Extension of Manufactures--Factory\nSystem, &c.\n\nChap. IV.--Foreign Competition.\n\n\nPART III.\n\nChap. I.--Free Trade, Corn Laws.\n\nChap. II.--Free Trade, continued--New Tariff, Provisions, Sugar, &c.\nReciprocity System--Commercial Treaties.\n\nChap. III.--Taxation.\n\nChap. IV.--Currency and Banking.\n\nChap. V.--Emigration.\n\nChap. VI.--Poor Laws.\n\nChap. VII.--Sanitary and Building Regulations, &c.\n\nChap. VIII.--Education.\n\nChap. IX.--Conclusion.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nLONDON:\n\nPublished by Longman and Co.; Simpkin and Marshall; And Whittaker and\nCo.\n\nalso,\n\nAt the Atlas Office, 6, Southampton-street, Strand.","title":"An Expository Outline of the \"Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation\": With a Notice of the Author's \"Explanations:\" A Sequel to the Vestiges","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":24112}