{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_39910/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_39910","id":"gutenberg_39910","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/39910","summary":null,"tags":["Bible and geology","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Category: Science - Earth/Agricultural/Farming","Creation","Evolution (Biology)"],"text":"Produced by Mark C. Orton, Jana Srna, Josephine Paolucci\nand the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at\nhttp://www.pgdp.net.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nOMPHALOS:\n\nAN ATTEMPT TO UNTIE THE GEOLOGICAL KNOT.\n\nBY\n\nPHILIP HENRY GOSSE, F.R.S.\n\nWITH FIFTY-SIX ILLUSTRATIONS ON WOOD.\n\n     [Greek: Auxanetai de ta z\u00f4a panta, osa echei omphalon, dia tou\n             omphalou.]\n\n     ARIST.; _Hist. Anim._ vii. 8.\n\n\nLONDON:\nJOHN VAN VOORST; PATERNOSTER ROW.\n1857.\n\n\nLONDON:\nR. CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD STREET HILL.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\n\"You have not allowed for the wind, Hubert,\" said Locksley, in\n\"Ivanhoe;\" \"or that had been a better shot.\"\n\nI remember, when I was in Newfoundland, some five-and-twenty years ago,\nthe disastrous wreck of the brig _Elizabeth_, which belonged to the firm\nin which I was a clerk. The master had made a good observation the day\nbefore, which had determined his latitude some miles north of Cape St.\nFrancis. A thick fog coming on, he sailed boldly by compass, knowing\nthat, according to his latitude, he could well weather that promontory.\nBut lo! about midnight the ship plunged right against the cliffs of\nFerryland, thirty miles to the south, crushing in her bows to the\nwindlass; and presently went down, the crew barely saving their lives.\nThe captain _had not allowed for the polar current_, which was setting,\nlike a sluice, to the southward, between the Grand Bank and the land.\n\nWhen it was satisfactorily ascertained that the heavenly body, now known\nas Uranus, was a planet, its normal path was soon laid down according to\nthe recognised law of gravitation. But it would not take this path.\nThere were deviations and anomalies in its observed course, which could\nin nowise be referred to the operation of any known principle.\nAstronomers were sorely puzzled to explain the irregularities, and to\nreconcile facts with laws. Various hypotheses were proposed: some denied\nthe facts; that is, the observed places of the planet, boldly assuming\nthat the observers had been in error: others suggested that perhaps the\nphysical laws, which had been supposed to govern the whole celestial\nmachinery, did not reach so far as Uranus's orbit. The secret is now\nknown: _they had not allowed for the disturbances produced by Neptune_.\n\nIn each of these cases the conclusions were legitimately deduced from\nthe recognised premises. Hubert's skilled eye had calculated the\ndistance; his experience had taught him the requisite angle at which to\nshoot, the exact amount of force necessary, and every other element\nproper to insure the desired result, _except one_. There was an element\nwhich he had overlooked; and it spoiled his calculations. _He had\nforgotten the wind._\n\nThe master of the ill-fated brig had calculated his latitude correctly;\nhe knew the rate of his vessel's speed; the compass had showed him the\nparallel on which to steer. These premises ought to have secured a safe\nconclusion; and so they would, but for an unrecognised power that\nvitiated all; he was not aware of the silent and secret current, that\nwas every hour setting him to the south of his supposed latitude.\n\nThe path of Uranus had been calculated by the astronomers with\nscrupulous care, and every known element of disturbance had been\nconsidered; not by one, but by many. But for the fact that the planet\nhad been previously seen in positions quite inconsistent with such a\npath, it would have been set down as beyond controversy correct.\nStubborn fact, however, would not give way; and hence the dilemma, till\nLe Verrier suggested the unseen antagonist.\n\nI venture to suggest in the following pages an element, hitherto\noverlooked, which disturbs the conclusions of geologists respecting the\nantiquity of the earth. Their calculations are sound on the recognised\npremises; _but they have not allowed for the Law of Prochronism in\nCreation_.\n\nThe enunciation of this principle will lie in a nut-shell; the reader\nwill find it at p.124; or p.347. All the rest of the book is\nillustration.\n\nI do not claim originality for the thought which I have here endeavoured\nto work out. It was suggested to me by a Tract, which I met with some\ndozen years ago, or more; the title of which I have forgotten: I am\npretty sure it was anonymous, but it was published by Campbell, of 1,\nWarwick Square. Whether it is still in print I do not know; I never saw\nanother copy. If the author is alive, and if he should happen to cast\nhis eye on this volume, he will doubtless recognise his own bantling,\nand accept this my acknowledgment.\n\nThe germ of the argument, however, I have found, since these pages were\nwritten, in \"The Mineral and Mosaical Geologies,\" of Granville Penn\n(1822). The state of physical science when he wrote did not enable him\nto press the argument to a demonstration, as I have endeavoured to do;\nfor he could not refer to structural peculiarities as sensible records\nof past processes, _inseparable from newly created organisms_.\n\nI would not be considered as an opponent of geologists; but rather as a\nco-searcher with them after that which they value as highly as I do,\nTRUTH. The path which I have pursued has led me to a conclusion at\nvariance with theirs. I have a right to expect that it be weighed; let\nit not be imputed to vanity if I hope that it may be accepted.\n\nBut what I much more ardently desire is, that the thousands of thinking\npersons, who are scarcely satisfied with the extant reconciliations of\nScriptural statements and Geological deductions,--who are silenced but\nnot convinced,--may find, in the principle set forth in this volume, a\nstable resting-place. I have written it in the constant prayer that the\nGod of Truth will deign so to use it; and if He do, to Him be all the\nglory!\n\nP. H. G.\n\nMARYCHURCH, TORQUAY,\n\n_October, 1857_.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\nI\n\nTHE CAUSE.\n\n     Evidence of the Senses often delusive--Deductions of Reason\n     fallible--Essentials sometimes overlooked--Discrepancy\n     between Scripture and Geological Conclusions--Painful\n     Dilemma--Efforts to escape from it--Supremacy of\n     Truth--Various Attempts at Reconciliation--Denouncers--Opinions\n     of Brown--Blackwood--Macbrair--Ure--Penn--Young--Cockburn--\n     Miller--Sedgwick--Turner--Sumner--Chalmers--Harris--Gray--\n     Conybeare--Hitchcock--Pye Smith--\"Protoplast\"--Babbage--\n     Powell--\"Vestiges\"--Amplitude of Choice                    _Page_ 1-29\n\n\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE WITNESS FOR THE MACRO-CHRONOLOGY.\n\n     A Court of Inquiry--The Witnesses--Testimony of One--Strata\n     of Thames Tunnel--of Hertfordshire--of Yorkshire--of the\n     Globe--Granite--Granitic Strata--Organic Remains--Silurian\n     System--Corals--Trilobites--Mollusks--Devonian System--Old\n     Red Sandstone--Its Formation--Fishes--Carboniferous\n     System--Coral Limestone--Millstone Grit--Coal--Predominance\n     of Carbonic Acid--Extent and Thickness of\n     Coal-Fields--Formation of Coal--Conjecture as to its\n     Age--Antediluvian Theory untenable--Sauroid Fishes--Earliest\n     Reptiles--Footprints of Frogs                                    30-53\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE SAME--(_continued_.)\n\n     Disturbances of Strata--Internal Heat--Changes of Land and\n     Sea--New Red Sandstone--Footprints--Labyrinthodon--Lias\n     Formation--Crinoids--Ammonites--Belemnites--Fishes--Marine\n     Reptiles--Ichthyosaur--Plesiosaur--European\n     Archipelago--Oolitic Formation--Cycads--Megalosaur--\n     Bat-Lizards--Iguanodon--Hyl\u00e6osaur--Earliest\n     Mammal--Chalk Formation--Infusoria--Diatomace\u00e6--Their\n     Minuteness and Numbers--Chambered Cephalopods--Mosasaur--End\n     of Secondary Formations--Convulsions--Basalt--Uprearing of\n     Mountain Chains--London Clay--Plants and\n     Animals--Fishes--Reptiles--Birds--Mammals--Anoplotherium--Condition\n     of Europe--Dinotherium--Mastodon--Mammoth--Trees--Crag\n     Formation--Tertiary Fauna--Bone Caves--Kirkdale--Erratic\n     Blocks--Glaciers--Sloths--Marsupials--Birds--Raised\n     Beaches--Human Period--Moho--Present Cosmical\n     Operations--River Deltas--Coral Beefs--Volcanoes--Changes of\n     Level--Earthy Deposits--Stalagmite--Shells--Recapitulation.     54-101\n\n\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE CROSS-EXAMINATION.\n\n     Grandeur of the Evidence--Proposed Line of Objection--It is\n     but circumstantial--Example of Confusion of\n     Thought--Analysis of the Reasoning---Dependent on the\n     exhaustive Power of Observation--Relation of Precedence and\n     Sequence--Of Cause and Effect--Force of my Position.           102-109\n\n\nV.\n\nPOSTULATES.\n\n     The Creation of Matter--The Persistence of Species.            110-112\n\n\nVI.\n\nLAWS.\n\n     The Course of Nature a Circle--Illustrations--Scarlet\n     Runner--Lady-fern--Hawkmoth--Plumularia--Cow--Universality\n     of the Law--Creation an Irruption into a Circle--False\n     Witness to Past Processes--Prochronism and\n     Diachronism--Phenomena illusory--Recapitulation                113-126\n\n\nVII.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Plants._)\n\n     Ideal Tour on Creation-Day--Chronological\n     Investigations--Queried Age of a Tree-fern--Data for the\n     Inquiry--Development of the Leaves--Leaf-scars--Report--Its\n     manifest Error--Selaginella--Bamboo--\n     Couch-grass--Screw-pine--Pashiuba--Sugar\n     Palm--Areca--Rattan--Agave--Traveller's Tree--Butterfly\n     Flower--Orchis--Gladiolus--Grass-tree--White\n     Lily--Testudinaria--Caffer-Bread--Fig--Banyan--Euphorbia--\n     Tulip-tree--Bignonia--Loranthus--Prickly\n     Pear--Mangrove--Silk-cotton-tree--Locust-tree--Restriction\n     of the Inquiry--Uniform Testimony to Untruth                  127-181\n\n\n\n\nVIII.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Invertebrate Animals._)\n\n    Resumption of the Examination--SeaPen--Millepore--\n    Madrepore--Organ-pipe--Medusa--Sea-urchin--Feather-star--\n    Tapeworm--Serpula--Terebella--White-ant--Goliath-beetle--\n    Gnat--Case-fly--Melicerta--Julus--Buprestis--Shore-crab--\n    Barnacle--Lepralia--Botryllus--Clavagella--Prickly\n    Venus--Scorpion Stromb--Tiger Cowry--Thorny Murex--Pearly\n    Nautilus--Cuttlefish                                            182-239\n\n\nIX.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Vertebrate Animals._)\n\n     Examination of the Vertebrata--Sword-fish--Gilt-head--\n     Lamin\u00e6 of Scales--Shark--Arrangement of Teeth--Their\n     Structure--Tree-frog--Metamorphosis--Rattlesnake--\n     Crocodile--Tortoise--Lamin\u00e6 of Plates--Skull of\n     Cassowary--Peacock--Humming-bird--Trogon--Structure and\n     Growth of Feathers--Whalebone of Whale--Horn of Ibex--Horn\n     of Stag--Teeth of Horse--Of Babiroussa--Of\n     Hippopotamus--Tusk of Elephant--Molars of Elephant             240-273\n\n\nX.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Man._)\n\n     Examination of Primal Man--Blood--Its Formation--Its\n     Oxygenation--Nails--Hair--Bones--Teeth--All formed by\n     successive Processes--Stature--Thyroid\n     Cartilage--Beard--Development of Teeth--Proportion of\n     Bloods--Condition of Skeleton--Navel--False Conclusion         274-291\n\n\nXI.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Germs._)\n\n     Assumption of adult Development at Creation--Its\n     Reasonableness--The Position waived--Assumption of the\n     Germ-Hypothesis--Double Cocoa-nut--Coral\n     Tree--Tulip--Earth-pea--Mangrove--Medusa--Connexion of Germs\n     with Parent--In Echinoderms--In Annelids--In Insects--Egg of\n     Butterfly--Of Nut Weevil--Of Bots--Of Ichneumon--Of Pill\n     Chafer--Of Gall-fly--Of Lace-fly--Of Spider--Of Gipsy\n     Moth--Of Coccus--Of Saw-fly--Of Cockroach--Of\n     Dirt-dauber--Metamorphosis of Star-fish--Eggs attached to\n     Brachionus--Viviparous Progeny of Rotifer--Of Asplanchna--Of\n     Daphnia--Egg-purse of Shark--Economy of Surinam Toad--Egg of\n     Fowl--Foetus of Kangaroo--Umbilicus                            292-334\n\n\n\n\nXII.\n\nTHE CONCLUSION.\n\n     Uniformity of Results--Prochronism of Organic\n     Nature--Phenomena inadequate to settle Chronology--Historic\n     Testimony alone oracular--Familiar Illustration--Objections\n     met--Analogy between an Organism and a World--Illustration\n     from a Tree--Analogy between the Life of a Species and that\n     of an Individual--History Divinely Projected--Grand Plan of\n     Nature--Diachronic Existence not necessary--Deceptive\n     Phenomena inseparable from Created Organisms--Illustrations\n     abundant--Hypothesis of the Life-history of the\n     Globe--Supposition of 1857 being the Era of Creation--What\n     its State?--Minuteness and Verity of Proofs of Life present\n     no Difficulty--Coprolites--F\u00e6cal Residua in newly-created\n     Animals--_Cyclical_ not _Organic_ Condition the Test of\n     Prochronism--Illustrations from the inorganic\n     World--Rivers--Ocean Currents--Celestial Bodies--Velocity of\n     Light--Records of Entities actually passed--\"No Tree has\n     Leaves\"--Plates of Testudinaria--Leaf-scars of Palm--Column\n     of Nerita--Spines of Murex--Madreporic Plate of\n     Cribella--Hilum of Seed--Navel of Mammal--Argument of \"Great\n     and Small\"--Old Hypothesis of _Lusus Natur\u00e6_--Demonstration\n     of a Law--Effect of this Principle on the Study of\n     Geology--Summing up                                            335-372\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.\n\n                                                                    PAGE\n\nGeological Section of Yorkshire                                       35\nCalymene Blumenbachii                                                 41\nCephalaspis                                                           44\nLabyrinthodon                                                         57\nSnake-necked Marine Lizards                                           59\nMegalosaurus Bucklandi                                                61\nBat-lizards                                                           62\nHyl\u00e6osaurus armatus                                                   63\nMammoth                                                               74\nMoho                                                                  84\nGermination of Scarlet-runner                                        114\nDiagram of Bean                                                      116\n\"  Fern                                                              117\n\"  Hawkmoth                                                          119\n\"  Polype                                                            120\n\"  Cow                                                               121\nLeaf-scars of Tree-fern                                              132\nRoots of Iriartea                                                    139\nTraveller's Tree                                                     148\nCorm of Gladiolus                                                    153\nSection of Lily-bulb                                                 157\nTestudinaria                                                         159\nEncephalartos                                                        162\nTwig of Tulip-tree                                                   167\nYoung Plant of Loranthus                                             171\nSilk-cotton Tree                                                     175\nSection of Exogenous Tree                                            179\nMuricated Madrepore                                                  185\nOrgan-pipe                                                           187\nComatula and Young                                                   194\nSerpula                                                              200\nGoliath Beetle and Pupa case                                         206\nLarva of Case-fly                                                    209\nMelicerta                                                            210\nLepas                                                                218\nBotryllus                                                            224\nClavagella                                                           226\nDione Veneris                                                        228\nMurex tenuispina                                                     233\nScale of Gilt-head                                                   242\nPlates of Tortoise                                                   251\nGrowth of a Feather                                                  254\nHorns of Stag                                                        258\nSkull of Babiroussa                                                  262\nSkull of Hippopotamus                                                265\nSkull of Elephant                                                    267\nGrowth of Hair                                                       278\nSection of Human Tooth                                               282\nGarden Tulip                                                         298\nGermination of Earth-pea                                             300\nSeed of Mangrove                                                     303\nLace-fly and Eggs                                                    312\nBrachionus with Eggs                                                 322\nPregnant Asplanchna                                                  323\nHen's Egg                                                            329\nGyroceras                                                            371\n\n\n\n\n\n[Greek: HO OMPHALOS.]\n\n\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE CAUSE.\n\n\"Is there not a cause?\"--1 SAM. xvii. 29.\n\n\nAn eminent philosopher has observed that \"nothing can be more common or\nfrequent than to appeal to the evidence of the senses as the most\nunerring test of physical effects. It is by the organs of sense, and by\nthese alone, that we can acquire any knowledge of the qualities of\nexternal objects, and of their mutual effects when brought to act one\nupon another, whether mechanically, physically, or chemically; and it\nmight, therefore, not unreasonably be supposed, that what is called the\nevidence of the senses must be admitted to be conclusive, as to all the\nphenomena developed by such reciprocal action.\n\n\"Nevertheless, the fallacies are numberless into which those are led who\ntake what they consider the immediate results of sensible impressions,\nwithout submitting them to the severe control and disciplined analysis\nof the understanding.\"[1]\n\nIf this verdict is confessedly true with regard to many observations\nwhich we make on things immediately present to our senses, much more\nlikely is it to be true with respect to conclusions which are not \"the\nimmediate results of sensible impressions,\" but are merely deduced by a\nprocess of reasoning from such impressions. And if the direct evidence\nof our senses is to be received with a prudent reserve, because of this\npossibility of error, even when we have no evidence of an opposing\ncharacter, still more necessary is the exercise of caution in judging of\nfacts assumed to have occurred at a period far removed from our own\nexperience, and which stand in contradiction (at least apparent, _prim\u00e2\nfacie_, contradiction) to credible historic testimony. Nay, the caveat\nacquires a greatly intensified force, when the testimony with which the\nassumed facts are, or seem to be, at variance, is no less a testimony\nthan His who ordained the \"facts,\" who made the objects of\ninvestigation; the testimony of the Creator of all things; the testimony\nof Him who is, from eternity to eternity, \"[Greek: HO APSEUD\u00caS THEOS]\"!\n\nI hope I shall not be deemed censorious in stating my fear that those\nwho cultivate the physical sciences are not always sufficiently mindful\nof the \"_Humanum est errare_.\" What we have investigated with no little\nlabour and patience, what we have seen with our eyes many many times, in\nmany aspects, and under many circumstances, we naturally believe firmly;\nand we are very prone to attach the same assurance of certainty to the\ninferences we have, _bon\u00e2 fide_, and with scrupulous care to eliminate\nerror, deduced from our observations, as to the observations themselves;\nand we are apt to forget that some element of error may have crept into\nour actual investigations, and still more probably into our deductions.\nEven if our observations be so simple, so patent, so numerous, as\n_almost_ to preclude the possibility of mistake in them, and our process\nof reasoning from them be without a flaw, still we may have overlooked a\nprinciple, which, though perhaps not very obvious, ought to enter into\nthe investigation, and which, if recognised, would greatly modify our\nconclusions.\n\nIn this volume I venture to suggest such a principle to the\nconsideration of geologists. It will not be denied that Geology is a\nscience that stands peculiarly in need of being cultivated with that\nsalutary self-distrust that I have above alluded to. Though a strong and\nhealthy child, it is as yet but an infant. The objects on which its\nsenses have been exercised, its [Greek: ta blepomena], are indeed plain\nenough and numerous enough, when once discovered; but the inferences\ndrawn from them, its [Greek: bebaia], find their sphere in the most\nvenerably remote antiquity,--an antiquity mensurable not by years or\ncenturies, but by _secula seculorum_. And the dicta, which its votaries\nrest on as certitudes, are at variance with the simple literal sense of\nthe words of God.\n\nI am not assuming here that the Inspired Word has been rightly read; I\nmerely say that the plain straightforward meaning, the meaning that lies\nmanifestly on the face of the passages in question, is in opposition\nwith the conclusions which geologists have formed, as to the antiquity\nand the genesis of the globe on which we live.\n\nPerhaps the simple, superficial sense of the Word is not the correct\none; but it is at least that which its readers, learned and unlearned,\nhad been generally content with before; and which would, I suppose,\nscarcely have been questioned, but for what appeared the exigencies of\ngeological facts.\n\nNow while there are, unhappily, not a few infidels, professed or\nconcealed, who eagerly seize on any apparent discrepancy between the\nworks and the Word of God, in order that they may invalidate the truth\nof the latter, there are, especially in this country, many names of the\nhighest rank in physical (and, among other branches, in geological)\nscience, to whom the veracity of God is as dear as life. They cannot\nbear to see it impugned; they know that it cannot be overthrown; they\nare assured that He who gave the Word, and He who made the worlds, is\nOne Jehovah, who cannot be inconsistent with Himself. But they cannot\nshut their eyes to the startling fact, that the records which _seem_\nlegibly written on His created works do flatly contradict the statements\nwhich _seem_ to be plainly expressed in His word.\n\nHere is a dilemma. A most painful one to the reverent mind! And many\nreverent minds have laboured hard and long to escape from it. It is\nunfair and dishonest to class our men of science with the infidel and\natheist. They did not rejoice in the dilemma; they saw it at first\ndimly, and hoped to avoid it.[2] At first they believed that the mighty\nprocesses which are recorded on the \"everlasting mountains\" might not\nonly be harmonized with, but might afford beautiful and convincing\ndemonstrations of Holy Scripture. They thought that the deluge of Noah\nwould explain the stratification, and the antediluvian era account for\nthe organic fossils.\n\nAs the \"stone book\" was further read, this mode of explanation appeared\nto many untenable; and they retracted their adherence to it. To a mind\nrightly constituted, Truth is above every thing: there is no such thing\nas a pious fraud; the very idea is an impious lie: God is light, and in\nHim is no darkness at all; and that religion which can be maintained\nonly by dissembling or denying truth, cannot proceed from \"Him that is\nHoly, Him that is True,\" but from him who \"is a liar, and the father of\nit.\"\n\nMany upright and ardent cultivators of the young science felt that truth\nwould be compromised by a persistence in those explanations which had\nhitherto passed current. The discrepancy between the readings in Science\nand the hitherto unchallenged readings in Scripture, became manifest.\nPartisans began to array themselves on either side; some, jealous for\nthe honour of God, knew little of science, and rushed into the field\nill-prepared for the conflict; some, jealous for science, but little\nconversant with Scripture, and caring less for it, were willing to throw\noverboard its authority altogether: others, who knew that the writings\nwere from the same Hand, knew therefore that there must be some way of\nreconciling them, and set themselves to find it out.\n\nHave they succeeded? If I thought so, I would not publish this book.\nMany, I doubt not, have been convinced by each of the schemes by which\nthe discrepant statements have been sought to be harmonized. Each of\nthem has had sufficient plausibility to convince its propounder; and,\nprobably, others too. And some of them have attained a large measure of\npublic confidence. Yet if any one of them is true, it certainly has not\ncommanded universal assent. Let us examine how far they agree among\nthemselves, who propose to reconcile Scripture and Science, \"the Mosaic\nand the Mineral Geologies.\"\n\nAnd first, it is, perhaps, right to represent the opinions of those who\nstand by the literal acceptation of the Divine Word. There have been\nsome, indeed, who refuse to entertain the question of reconciliation,\ntaking the high ground that, as the Word of God is and must be true, it\nis impious to set any evidence in competition with it. I cannot but say,\nmy sympathies are far more with these than with those who, at the\nopposite pole of the argument, would make scientific deduction\nparamount, and make the Word go to the wall. But, then, we ought to be\nquite sure that we have got the very Word of God; and, so far from being\nimpious, it seems highly proper and right, when conflicting evidence\nappears to flow out of what is indubitably God's _work_, to examine\nafresh the witnesses on both sides, that we may not make either testify\nwhat it does not.\n\nThose good men who merely _denounce_ Geology and geologists, I do not\nquote. There are the facts, \"written and engraven in stones,\" and that\nby the finger of God. How can they be accounted for?\n\nSome have recourse to the assumption that the natural processes by\nwhich changes in the earth's surface are now going on, may have operated\nin antediluvian times with a rapidity and power of which we can form\nlittle conception from what we are cognisant of. The Rev. J. Mellor\nBrown takes this ground, adducing the analogies of steam-power and\nelectricity, as effecting in a few moments or hours, what formerly would\nhave required several days or weeks to accomplish.\n\n\"God's most tremendous agencies may have been employed in the beginning\nof his works. If, for instance, it should be conceded that the granitic\nor basaltic strata were once in a state of fusion, there is no reason\nwhy we should not call in the aid of supposition to produce a _rapid_\nrefrigeration. We may surround the globe with an atmosphere (not as yet\nwarmed by the rays of the newly kindled sun) more intensely cold than\nthat of Saturn. The degree of cold may have been such as to cool down\nthe liquid granite and basalt in a few hours, and render it congenial to\nanimal and vegetable life; while the gelid air around the globe may have\nbeen mollified by the abstracted caloric.\"[3]\n\nA writer in Blackwood (xli. 181; xlii. 690), in like manner, adheres to\nthe literal sense of Genesis and the Decalogue, and alludes to\n\"the great agencies--the magnetic, electrical, and ethereal\ninfluences--probably instrumental in all the phenomena of nature,\" as\nbeing far more powerful than is generally suspected.\n\nMr. Macbrair--who does not, however, appear, from the amount of his\nacquaintance with science, competent to judge of the physical\nevidence--supposes stratification to have proceeded with immense\nrapidity, because limestone is now deposited in some waters at the rate\nof six inches per annum. Because a mass of timber, ten miles in length,\nwas collected in the Mississippi, in thirty-eight years, he considers\nthat a \"capital coal field\" might be formed in a single century.\nAlluvial strata are mud lavas ejected from volcanoes. The whole\ndifficulty of fossil remains is got rid of by ignoring the distinctions\nof species, and assuming that the ancient animals and the recent ones\nare identical. The Pterodactyle and the Plesiosaurus he does not allude\nto.[4]\n\nAccording to Dr. Ure,--\"The demiurgic week ... is manifestly composed of\nsix working days like our own, and a day of rest, each of equal length,\nand, therefore, containing an evening and a morning, measured by the\nrotation of the earth round its axis.... Neither reason nor revelation\nwill justify us in extending the origin of the material system beyond\nsix thousand years from our own days. The world then received its\nsubstance, form, and motions from the volition of the Omnipotent.\"\n\nHis theory of the stratification extends over the whole antediluvian\nera. He supposes that successive irruptions of the central heat broke up\nthe primitive strata and deposited the secondary and tertiary. \"The\nbasaltic or trap phenomena lead to the conclusion that such upheavings\nand subversions were not confined to one epoch of the antediluvian\nworld, but that, coeval with its birth, they pervaded the whole period\nof its duration.... The Deluge--that universal transflux of the\nocean--was the last and greatest of these terraqueous convulsions.\"[5]\n\nAnother class of this school of interpreters refers the stratification\nof the earth, either to the deluge alone, or to that convulsion\nconjoined with the one which is considered to have taken place on the\nthird day of the Mosaic narrative. Perhaps the most eminent writer of\nthis class is Mr. Granville Penn, whose opinions may be thus condensed.\n\nHe supposes that this globe has undergone only two revolutions. The\nfirst was the violent rupture and depression of the surface to become\nthe bed of the sea, and the simultaneous elevation of the other portion\nto become dry land,--the theatre of terrestrial existence. This first\nrevolution took place before the creation of any organized beings. The\nsecond revolution was at the Noachic Flood, when the former bed of the\nsea was elevated to become the dry land, with all its organic\naccumulations of sixteen centuries, while the former land was\ncorrespondingly depressed and overflowed. \"The earth must, therefore,\nnecessarily exhibit manifest and universal evidences of the vast\napparent ruin occasioned by its first violent disruption and depression;\nof the presence and operation of the marine fluid, during the long\ninterval which succeeded; and of the action and effects of that fluid in\nits ultimate retreat.\"[6]\n\nMr. Fairholme[7] so nearly agrees with the above, that I need not quote\nhis opinions in detail.\n\nAnother class, represented by Dr. Young and the Rev. Sir W. Cockburn,\nDean of York, have maintained with considerable power, backed by no mean\ngeological knowledge, that the deluge is a sufficient _vera causa_ for\nthe stratification of the globe, and for the fossilization of the\norganic remains.\n\nDr. Young supposes that an equable climate prevailed all over the globe\nin the antediluvian period. \"Were the highest mountains transferred to\nthe equatorial regions, the most extensive oceans removed towards the\npoles, and fringed with a border of archipelago,--while lands of\nmoderate height occupied most of the intermediate spaces, between these\narchipelagos and the equatorial mountains; then a temperature, almost\nuniform, would prevail throughout the world.\" This \"perpetual summer\"\nwould account for the prodigious quantities of animal and vegetable\nremains:--every region teemed with life.\n\nAt the Flood, \"the bed of the ocean must have been elevated, and the dry\nland at the same time depressed,\" an expansive force acting from below\nto heave up the ocean's bed. To this agency are attributed the vast\nmasses of granite, gneiss, basalt, and other rocks of igneous origin,\nwhich seem to have been forced upwards in a state of fusion, into their\npresent lofty stations. The ancient bed of the ocean may have consisted\nof numerous layers of sand, clay, lime, and other substances, including\ncorals and marine shells,--to a certain degree consolidated into rocks.\nBy the progressive rising of the waters and the currents so made, fresh\nmaterials would be conveyed to the depths of the ocean, so that the\nmagnesian limestone, the saliferous beds, the lias, &c., would be\ndeposited.[8]\n\nThe Dean of York, in like manner, considers that the convulsions\nproduced by the Deluge, are sufficient to account for all the\nstratification and fossil remains. That the gradual rise of the waters,\nand their penetration into the recesses of the rocks, would cause\nsuccessive volcanic eruptions; the earlier of which would inclose marine\nfishes and reptiles; then others in turn, the pachyderms and great\nreptiles of the plains; and, finally, the creatures more exclusively\nterrestrial. That these repeated heavings of mighty volcanoes raised\ngreat part of what had been the bottom of the sea, above its level, and\nthat hence the present land had been for sixteen centuries under water.\nThat the animals which entered the ark, were not selected till after\nmany species had already perished in the earlier convulsions, and hence\nthe number of extinct species now exhumed.[9]\n\nMy reader will kindly bear in mind that I am not examining these\nopinions; I adduce them as examples of the diversity of judgment that\nstill prevails on a question which some affect to consider as settled\nbeyond the approach of doubt.\n\nA totally different solution of the difficulty has been sought in the\nhypothesis, that the six \"days\" of the Inspired Record signify six\nsuccessive periods of immense though of undefined duration. This opinion\nis as old as the Fathers at least,[10] and not a few able maintainers of\nit belong to our own times. It has been put forth, however, with most\npower, by a late lamented geologist, whose wonderful vigour of\ndescription and felicity of illustration, have done, perhaps, more than\nthe efforts of any other living man, to render his favourite science\npopular.\n\nPerhaps I can scarcely set his views in a more striking light than he\nhimself has done in his own peculiarly graphic report of a conversation,\nwhich he sustained with some humble inquirers in the Paleontological\nGallery of the British Museum.\n\n\"I last passed,\" says Mr. Hugh Miller, \"through this wonderful gallery\nat the time when the attraction of the Great Exhibition had filled\nLondon with curious visitors from all parts of the empire; and a group\nof intelligent mechanics, fresh from some manufacturing town in the\nmidland counties, were sauntering on through its chambers immediately\nbefore me. They stood amazed beneath the dragons of the Oolite and Lias;\nand, with more than the admiration and wonder of the disciples of old,\nwhen contemplating the huge stones of the Temple, they turned to say, in\nalmost the old words, 'Lo! master, what manner of great beasts are\nthese?' 'These are,' I replied, 'the sea-monsters and creeping things of\nthe second great period of organic existence.' The reply seemed\nsatisfactory, and we passed on together to the terminal apartments of\nthe range appropriated to the tertiary organisms. And there, before the\nenormous mammals, the mechanics again stood in wonder, and turned to\ninquire. Anticipating the query, I said, 'And these are the huge beasts\nof the earth, and the cattle of the third great period of organic\nexistence; and yonder in the same apartment, you see, but at its farther\nend, is the famous fossil Man of Guadaloupe, locked up by the\npetrifactive agencies in a slab of limestone.' The mechanics again\nseemed satisfied; and, of course, had I encountered them in the first\nchamber of the suite, and had they questioned me respecting the\norganisms with which _it_ is occupied, I would have told them that they\nwere the remains of the herbs and trees of the _first_ great period of\norganic existence. But in the chamber of the mammals we parted, and I\nsaw them no more.\"[11]\n\nA large and influential section of the students of Geology regard this\nhypothesis as untenable. Generally they may be described as holding that\nthe history which is recorded in the igneous and fossiliferous strata\ndoes not come into the sacred narrative in any shape. As, however, that\nnarrative commences with \"the beginning,\" and comes down to historic\ntimes, the facts so recorded must find their chronology within its\nbounds. Their place is accordingly fixed by this school of\ninterpretation between the actual primordial creation (Gen. i. 1), and\nthe chaotic state (ver. 2).\n\nLet us hear an able and eloquent geologist, Professor Sedgwick, on the\nhypothesis just mentioned of the elongation of the six days:--\n\n\"They [certain excellent Christian writers on the subject of Geology]\nhave not denied the facts established by this science, nor have they\nconfounded the nature of physical and moral evidence; but they have\nprematurely (and, therefore, without an adequate knowledge of all the\nfacts essential to the argument) endeavoured to bring the natural\nhistory of the earth into a literal accordance with the Book of Genesis;\nfirst, by greatly extending the periods of time implied by the six days\nof creation; and secondly, by endeavouring to show that under this new\ninterpretation of its words, the narrative of Moses may be supposed to\ncomprehend, and to describe in order, the successive epochs of Geology.\nIt is to be feared that truth may, in this way, receive a double injury;\nand I am certain that the argument just alluded to has been\nunsuccessful.\"--\"We must consider the old strata of the earth as\nmonuments of a date long anterior to the existence of man, and to the\ntimes contemplated in the moral records of his creation.\"[12]\n\nMany able theologians, who, though well acquainted with natural science,\ncan scarcely be considered as geologists, have been satisfied with this\nsolution of the problem.\n\nThus Sharon Turner:--\n\n\"What interval occurred between the first creation of the material\nsubstance of our globe, and the mandate for light to descend upon it,\nwhether months, years, or ages, is not in the slightest degree noticed\n[in the Sacred Record]. Geology may shorten or extend its duration, as\nit may find proper.\"[13]\n\nThus the present Archbishop of Canterbury:--\n\n\"We are not called upon to deny the possible existence of previous\nworlds, from the wreck of which our globe was organized, and the ruins\nof which are now furnishing matter for our curiosity.\"[14]\n\nThus Dr. Chalmers:--\n\n\"The present economy of terrestrial things was raised about six thousand\nyears ago on the basis of an earth then without form and void; while,\nfor aught of information we have in the Bible, the earth itself may\nbefore this time have been the theatre of many lengthened processes, the\ndwelling-place of older economies that have now gone by, but whereof the\nvestiges subsist even to the present day, both to the needless alarm of\nthose who befriend Christianity, and the unwarrantable triumph of those\nwho have assailed it.\"[15]\n\nThus Dr. Harris:--\n\n\"The first verse of Genesis was designed to announce the absolute\norigination of the material universe by the Almighty Creator; and,\npassing by an indefinite interval, the second verse describes the state\nof our planet immediately prior to the Adamic creation; and the third\nverse begins the account of the six days' work.\"[16]\n\nThus Mr. Gray:--\n\n\"That an antecedent state of the earth existed before the recorded\nMosaical epoch, will clearly come out to view by the consideration of\nthe terms used in the second verse. There was at that period, according\nto the express Mosaic record, anterior to the six days' reduction into\norder, _existing earth_ and _existing water_.\"[17]\n\nProbably the majority of our ablest geologists, men who have devoted\ntheir lives to the study and elucidation of geological phenomena, are to\nbe found among those who advocate this scheme of reconciling those\nphenomena with the statements of the Holy Scriptures. Thus one of the\nearliest cultivators of the science, the Rev. Dr. Conybeare:--\n\n\"I regard Gen. i. 1 as an universal proposition, intended to contradict\nall the heathen systems which supposed the eternity of matter or\npolytheism; and ver. 2 I regard as proceeding to take up our planet in a\nstate of ruin from a former condition, and describing a succession of\nphenomena effected in part by the laws of nature (which are no more\nthan our expression of God's observed method of working), and in part by\nthe immediate exercise of Divine power in directing and creating.\"[18]\n\nDr. Hitchcock, President of Amherst College, U.S., gives in his adhesion\nto this principle. After summing up the evidence in favour of the\nearth's high antiquity, he inquires, \"Who will hesitate to say that it\nought to settle the interpretation of the first verse of Genesis, in\nfavour of that meaning which allows an intervening period between the\ncreation of matter and the creation of light? This interpretation of\nGenesis is entirely sufficient to remove all apparent collision between\nGeology and revelation. It gives the geologist full scope for his\nlargest speculations concerning the age of the world. It permits him to\nmaintain that its first condition was as unlike to the present as\npossible, and allows him time enough for all the changes of mineral\nconstitution and organic life which its strata reveal. It supposes that\nall these are passed over in silence by the sacred writers, because\nirrelevant to the object of revelation; but full of interest and\ninstruction to the men of science who should afterwards take pleasure\nin exploring the works of God.\n\n\"It supposes the six days' work of creation to have been confined\nentirely to the fitting up the world in its present condition, and\nfurnishing it with its present inhabitants. Thus, while it gives the\nwidest scope to the geologist, it does not encroach upon the\nliteralities of the Bible; and hence it is not strange that it should be\nalmost universally adopted by geologists, as well as by many eminent\ndivines.\"[19]\n\nDr. Pye Smith, accepting the immense undefined interval between the\nevent of the first verse, and the condition chronicled in the second,\nheld the somewhat remarkable opinion that the term \"earth\" in that\nverse, and throughout the whole description of the six days, is\n\"designed to express the part of our world which God was adapting for\nthe dwelling of man and the animals connected with him.\" And that\nportion he conceived to have been \"a part of Asia, lying between the\nCaucasian ridge, the Caspian Sea, and Tartary on the north, the Persian\nand Indian Seas on the south, and the high mountain ridges which run at\nconsiderable distances on the eastern and western flank.\"\n\nThe whole of the six days' creation was confined, on this hypothesis, to\nthe re-stocking, with plants and animals, of this limited region after\nan inundation caused by its subsidence. The flood of Noah was nothing\nmore than a second overflowing of the same region, by \"an elevation of\nthe bed of the Persian and Indian Seas, or a subsidence of the inhabited\nland towards the south.\"[20]\n\nThe author of \"The Protoplast\" has made the very original suggestion,\nthat the geological periods may have occurred during the paradisaical\ncondition of man, which he thinks was of an indefinitely protracted\nduration, human chronology commencing at the Fall.\n\n\"We have no data in Scripture from which to gather certain information,\nand Adam may have lived unfallen _one day_, or _millions of years_.\" The\nyears of the first man's mortal life began to be reckoned when his\nimmortality ceased. He was nine hundred and thirty years _old_:[21] he\nhad been nine hundred and thirty years gradually decaying, slowly\ndying.\n\n\"It may, indeed, be said that no man could have survived those\nconvulsions of nature, of which traces have been discovered in the\nearth's crust. I would reply to this;--First, that we have no reason to\nsuppose that these changes affected the whole globe _at once_; they may\nhave been _partial and successive_; and the world's Eden may have been a\nspot peculiarly exempted from their influence. Secondly, that Adam's\nbody before the fall was not constituted as ours now are; it was\nincorruptible and immortal: physical phenomena could have had no\ndeleterious effect upon him.\" \"Why should we find any difficulty in\nsupposing that the geological changes which appear to have passed upon\nthe globe, _after_ its creation, and _before_ its curse, were to the\nfirst man sources of ever-renewing admiration, delight, and advantage?\n\n\"Inclining to the belief that both the animal fell and the animal curse\nwere considerably antecedent to the sin of Adam, I see no difficulty in\nthe admission, that animal death may also have prevailed prior to that\nevent.\"[22]\n\nWhile all those writers whose opinions I have cited, feel it more or\nless incumbent on them to seek a reconciliation between the words of\nInspiration and the phenomena of Geology, there are not a few who\ndecline the task altogether. Some eminent in science seem, by their\nentire avoidance of the question, to allow judgment to go by default.\nOthers more boldly deny that the two can be accommodated.\n\nMr. Babbage appears to think the archaic Hebrew so insuperably obscure a\nlanguage, that no confidence can be put in our constructions of its\nstatements; an opinion which, if true, would make the revelation of God\nto us, with all its glorious types, and promises, and prophecies, more\ndubious than the readings of Egyptian papyri, or the decipherment of\nAssyrian cuneiforms.\n\nOn this notion, however, Dr. Pye Smith observes:--\"All competent\nscholars, of whatever opinions and parties they may be in other\nrespects, will agree to reject any imputation of uncertainty with\nrespect to the means of ascertaining the sense of the language.\"\n\nOthers find no difficulty in understanding the Hebrew, but in believing\nit.\n\nProfessor Baden Powell sees in the plain, unvarnished narrative of the\nHoly Spirit, only myth and poetry: it \"was not intended for an\nhistorical narrative\" at all; and he thinks (I hope incorrectly), that\nthere is a pretty general agreement with his views.\n\n\"Most rational persons,\" he says, \"now acknowledge the failure of the\nvarious attempts to reconcile the difficulty [between Geology and\nScripture] by any kind of verbal interpretation; they have learnt to see\nthat the 'six days of thousands of years' have, after all, no more\ncorrespondence with anything in Geology than with any sane\ninterpretation of the text. And that the 'immense period at the\nbeginning,' followed by a recent literal great catastrophe, and final\nreconstruction in a week, is, if possible, more strangely at variance\nwith science, Scripture, and common sense. Yet while they [viz. the\n'rational persons,'] thus view the labours of the Bible-geologists as\nfruitless attempts, they often do not see--,\" &c. &c.[23]\n\nOf course this gives up the authority of Scripture altogether; and,\nconsistently enough, the author is severe upon the prevalent\n\"indiscriminate and unthinking Bibliolatry.\" \"If in any instance the\nletter of the narrative or form of expression may be found\n_irreconcilably at variance with physical truth_,[24] we may allow, to\nthose who prefer it, the alternative of understanding them either as\nreligious truths, represented under sensible images, or as descriptions\nof events according to the preconceptions of the writers, or the\ntraditions of the age.\"\n\nThe author of \"Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation\" propounds a\ntheory of organic origin much more worthy of God, than that \"mean view,\"\nwhich supposes Him \"to come in on frequent occasions with new fiats or\nspecial interferences.\" Coolly bowing aside His authority, this writer\nhas hatched a scheme, by which the immediate ancestor of Adam was a\nChimpanzee, and his remote ancestor a Maggot!\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nIn reviewing this array of opinions, is there not sufficient ground for\nregarding with caution the claim to certainty which has been boldly put\nforth for the conclusions of Geology? It cannot be denied that there is\nhere room for a very considerable amplitude of choice among discordant\nhypotheses. All cannot be true, unless on the principle which was\nclaimed for the Church by the Council of Trent--\"_Cum enim ecclesia\nduarum expositionum ubertate gaudeat, non esse eam ad unius penuriam\nrestrigendam!_\" I do not for a moment intend to put all these hypotheses\nand assumptions on the same level. They vary widely as to their\ntenableness, and as to their prevalence. But if we leave out of view the\nfears of those who, from insufficient acquaintance with science, are not\ncompetent to adjudicate on its positions, and those who despise or\ndecline Biblical authority altogether on this subject, we have still a\nsomewhat wide range to choose from. Shall we accept the _antediluvian_,\nor the _diluvian_ stratification? the six _ages_ or the six _days_ of\ncreation? the irruptions of internal fire that occurred chiliads _before\nMan was made_--those during his protracted _paradisaic state_, or those\nat the time _of the Flood_?--the extension of the Mosaic record _to\nuniversal nature_, or its limitation to a region of _south-western\nAsia_?\n\nI am not blaming, far less despising, the efforts that have been made\nfor harmonizing the teachings of Scripture and science. I heartily\nsympathise with them. What else could good men do? They could not shut\ntheir eyes to the facts which Geology reveals: to have said they were\nnot facts would have been simply absurd. Granting that the whole truth\nwas before them--the whole evidence--they could not arrive at other\nconclusions than those just recorded; and, therefore, I do not blame\ntheir discrepancy _inter se_. _The true key has not as yet been applied\nto the wards._ Until it be, you may force the lock, but you cannot open\nit. Whether the key offered in the following pages will open the lock,\nremains to be seen.\n\n\n\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE WITNESS FOR THE MACRO-CHRONOLOGY.\n\n     \"You shall well and truly try, and a true deliverance\n     make,... and a true verdict give, according to the\n     evidence.\"--(_Jury Oath._)\n\n\nA High Court of Inquiry has been sitting now for a good many years,\nwhose object is to determine a chronological question of much interest.\nIt is no less than the age of the globe on which we live. Counsel have\nbeen heard on both sides, and witnesses have been called, and most of\nthe judges have considered that an overwhelming preponderance of\ntestimony is in favour of an immeasurably vast antiquity. A single\nWitness on the other side, however, has deposed in a contrary sense:\nand, though he has said but little, some of those who have heard the\ncause attach such weight to his testimony, that they do not feel\nsatisfied to let it be overborne. Counsel on the former side have,\nindeed, cross-examined the Witness, and dissected his testimony with\nmuch skill, and they contend that what he said has been misunderstood by\nthe minority; and that, as his words may at least bear a sense which\nwould not contradict those of the opposing witness, the clear, copious,\nand unvarying deposition previously made, ought to command the verdict\nof the Court.\n\nThe minority are silenced, but not satisfied; they know not how to give\nup the Witness on whose veracity they have been wont to rely; but they\nare unable to answer the arguments brought against him.\n\nCounsel for the Brachy-chronology speaks. \"We respectfully ask the Court\nfor another hearing. Will our learned brother permit his witness briefly\nto recapitulate his testimony, and we will endeavour to examine it once\nmore; for we think we shall be able to detect some flaw in it?\" Rule\ngranted.\n\n\nWITNESS FOR THE MACRO-CHRONOLOGY.\n\nThe following, then, is the substance of what the witness deposes. He is\nnot a living witness; his testimony, therefore, is not oral, but\nwritten--lithographed, in fact. It consists of a number of documents,\nwhich are couched in a language and character not to be understood\nwithout some previous study, but yet very capable of translation--very\nclear and unmistakeable. The following, I say, is a condensed summary of\nthe leading points.\n\nIf a curious person had watched the process of making the excavations\nthat were preliminary to the boring of the Thames Tunnel, he would have\nobserved that the labourers exposed successive layers of earth,\ndiffering much in colour, consistency, and general character. First, an\naccumulation of soil, consisting of decayed vegetable and animal matter,\nmingled with broken pottery, and other rubbish of man's production, was\nremoved; then a layer of sand, gravel, and river mud; then a bed of\nreddish clay; then a layer of clay, mixed with silt or fine sandy mud;\nthen a thin layer of silt, much filled with shells; then a stratum of\nstiff blue clay; then a layer of clay of more mottled character,\ncontaining a portion of silt, and some shells; then a stratum of very\nfirm clay, so solid that it required to be broken with wedges; then a\nbed of gravel and sand of a green colour; and finally, a similar layer,\nbut of a coarser texture.\n\nIn the course of the hundred feet or so of perpendicular depth thus\nexposed, he would have seen a succession of layers, apparently deposited\nupon one another. But as yet he would have formed a very inadequate\nnotion of the stratification of the earth's crust.\n\nWith the knowledge thus gained, however, let him now make a little\nexcursion into Hertfordshire; we will suppose at the time when the\ncuttings for the Great Northern Railway were being made. When he came\nnear Cheshunt, he would see that the London clay, which he found\nunderlying the Thames, crops out, or disappears by the stratum coming\nobliquely to the surface. He would see, however, another bed of\nclay--the plastic clay--beneath this, which now forms the superficial\nstratum, and continues to do so, till he gets beyond Hertford. There\nthis stratum crops out; and the chalk, which for some time he has seen\nto underlie the plastic clay, now comes to the surface.\n\nBusiness or pleasure calls him to Bridlington on the Yorkshire coast;\nand he determines to make a pedestrian tour across the diameter of\nEngland to Whitehaven. He soon recognises the chalk, which constitutes\nthe Wolds, and rises to about 800 feet above the sea level. Below its\nescarpment he traces the Kimmeridge clay, the uppermost of a series of\nstrata more than 2,000 feet in thickness, that constitute the Oolitic\nsystem--including, among others, the coralline oolite, the calcareous\ngrit, the cornbrash, thin, but rich in fossils; the lower sandstone and\ncoal of the Cleveland hills, the alum shale, the marlstone, and the\nlower lias shale.\n\nThen comes a stratum of the saliferous system or the new red sandstone,\nwith the red marls, perhaps not much short of a thousand feet deep.\nBelow them the observer finds the strata of the magnesian limestone\nformation, for nearly 400 feet, resting on the great coal formations of\nvast depth. Of these the coal field of the West Riding is not less than\n4,000 feet in depth, and beneath it lie the millstone grit, and the\nmountain limestone, 2,500 feet more, the latter displayed in noble\ngrandeur on the faces of those wall-like precipices that inclose the\nromantic dales of the Swale and the Ure, and that subsequently tower in\nmagnificent altitude on the sides of Pennygant and Ingleborough.\n\n[Illustration: GEOLOGICAL SECTION OF YORKSHIRE.]\n\nOn the western escarpment of the Pennine ridge, just as the traveller is\nentering Westmoreland, he would detect the bottom of the limestone; and\nhere he would have an opportunity of seeing, what is rare in these\nparts, a stratum of the old red sandstone, lying between the former and\nthe slaty rocks of the Cumbrian formations. And here at length, in the\nwild and magnificent scenery of these mountains, he sees the primitive\nand transition series, the greenstone, the sienite, and the granite,\neach of which is discernible in succession on the face of one or other\nof the lofty Fells of Cumberland.\n\nOur traveller now comes home, and, musing on what he has seen, counts up\nsome thirty or more distinct strata lying in regular succession one on\nanother. But he has not seen all the world, nor even all England; but he\nreads the results of many independent observations, and finds that\nwhile, for the most part, the strata which he has seen are common to the\nwhole surface of the globe, and while the order of their superposition\nis invariable everywhere, others are in some parts added, while perhaps\nsome of those which he has observed are locally absent. Thus he is able\nto form a more distinct idea of the stratification of the earth's crust\nas a whole. It is composed of about forty distinct formations, generally\nincreasing in thickness as we go downwards, so that the whole cannot be\nmuch less than ten miles in depth, supposing them in any locality to be\nall present, and to be lying in the horizontal plane.\n\nMathematicians have satisfactorily determined that the mean density of\nthe globe is about five-and-a-half times that of water, or about twice\nthat of granite, a fact inconsistent with any other supposition than\nthat the interior is occupied by substances maintained in a fluid state\nby intense heat. The lowest point that has yet been patent to human\nobservation is occupied by the granite, a compound rock, which bears\nevident marks of having been once in a state of fusion, and of having\ncooled slowly, and that under immense pressure, contracting and\ncrystallizing as it parted with its heat. There is every reason to\nbelieve that the granite is not defined at its inferior surface, but\nthat it merges into the molten mass, probably still solidifying.\n\nAfter the outer portion of the granite had cooled sufficiently to become\nsolid, there is evidence that it was covered by water, agitated by\npowerful currents, and probably in a heated state. The action of these\ncurrents disintegrated the rock, and deposited the constituent\nsubstances at the bottom of the sea--on the surface, and in the hollows,\nof the granite. For there is reason to think that the contraction of the\nprimitive rock in the process of cooling, produced irregular undulations\nor crumplings of the surface, and frequent fractures and dislocations,\nelevating some parts and depressing others. The gneiss, the mica-schist,\nand the clay-slate, which are found immediately overlying the granitic\nrock in strata of vast thickness, are but the components of granite,\nseparated and rearranged. \"If we imagine common granite coarsely\npounded, and thrown into a vessel of water, it will arrange itself at\nthe bottom of the vessel in a condition very much like that of gneiss,\nwhich is indeed nothing else than stratified granite. If the water in\nwhich the pounded rock is thrown is moving along at a slow rate, and the\nclayey portion of the granite, called _felspar_, happens to be somewhat\ndecomposed, as it often is, then the felspar (which is so truly _clay_\nthat it makes the best possible material for the use of the potteries)\nand the thin shining plates of mica, will be carried further by the\nwater than the lumps of white quartz or flint sand, which, with the\nother two ingredients, made up the granite; and the two former will be\ndeposited in layers, which, by passing a galvanic current through them,\nwould in time become mica-schist. If the mica were absent, or if the\nclay were deposited without it, owing to any cause, then a similar\ngalvanic current would turn the deposit into something like\nclay-slate.\"[25]\n\nThe deposition of these strata, being formed out of granite, supposes\nthe pre-existence of that rock; and as they occur in vast thicknesses,\neven of many thousand feet, then separation, deposition, and\nreconsolidation must have occupied, however rapidly we may suppose the\nprocesses to have been accomplished, considerable periods of time.\n\nIn these lower rocks, no trace of organic remains has been found. The\nshoreless ocean that covered the cooling surface of the earth's crust,\nharboured no polype or sponge, no rhizopod or infusorium, and the angles\nand clefts of the granite were fringed by no fucus, or conferva: all was\nwaste and void. And if certain parts were elevated above the waters, the\nbleak and barren points were not clothed with grass, or moss, or even a\nlichen, and no animal wandered over their ridges. Or, if such did exist,\neither in land or water, all vestiges of their presence have been\ndestroyed by the agency of the intense heat that subsequently prevailed.\n\nBut, in the numerous strata that overlie the rocks of granitic origin,\nthere are found, in varying abundance, proofs that, when they were\ndeposited, the surface of our earth had become the abode of organic\nlife. Zoophytes lived in the ocean, some of which were engaged in\nsecreting lime from the water, and depositing it in coral-reefs; stalked\nand jointed Star-fishes waved like lilies of stone from the submerged\nrocks; Sea-worms twined over the mud; mailed Crustaceans swam to and\nfro; and Mollusks, both bivalve and univalve, crawled over the ledges or\nreposed in the crevices. The remains of these occur in the Silurian\nrocks that lie immediately on the primitive granitic formations of\nCumberland and North Wales. The construction of the coral-reefs of that\ndeposit, in particular, must have occupied a lengthened period,\ncontinuing to go on, \"month after month, year after year, century after\ncentury, until at length the depth changed, in which they could most\nconveniently live, or, owing to some other cause, their labours were\nbrought to a close, and they disappeared from amongst existing\nspecies.\"[26]\n\n[Illustration: A TRILOBITE.\n\n(_Calymene Blumenbachii._)\n\n_a._ extended; back view. _b._ rolled up; side view. _c._ rolled up;\nfront view.]\n\nNot a single species, or even a single genus of those early strata, is\nidentical with any that exists now. The Coral-polypes, for instance,\nwhile allied to ours, are quite distinct from them, though endowed with\nsimilar powers and habits, so that we may reason from analogy on the\nlaws of their deposits. The Trilobites were allied to the tiny\nwater-fleas (_Entomostraca_) of the present day: like the _Oniscid\u00e6_\n(wood-lice, buttons, &c.) of our gardens, they had the habit of rolling\ntheir plated bodies into a ball. These are found in great numbers, their\nremains often heaped on one another. The Mollusca of those seas were\nchiefly of the class _Cephalopoda_--one of the least populous\nnow-a-days, but then existing in vast number and variety; the\nBrachiopoda, Conchifera, and Gastropoda, were, however, well represented\nalso.\n\nSuch were the inhabitants of the sea during the Silurian period, in\nwhich a series of solid deposits were made, the aggregate, probably,\nexceeding 50,000 feet in thickness. Each deposit, though not more than a\nfew inches in depth, \"is provided with its own written story, its sacred\nmemoranda, assuring us of the regularity and order that prevailed, and\nof the perfect uniformity of plan.\"\n\nOver all these, however, we see laid the strata of the Devonian system,\nespecially the old red sandstone, which in some places attains a\nthickness of 10,000 feet. It is composed of a coarse agglomeration of\nbroken fragments of the old granitic rocks, rolled and tossed about,\napparently by the ever-breaking waves of shingle-beaches, until the\nhardest stones are worn into rounded pebbles by long and constant\nattrition.\n\nAn examination of the old red sandstone, as is seen in Herefordshire,\nwill aid us in forming a notion of the time required for its production.\nIt is composed of fragments obtained by the disintegration of more\nancient rocks, which, by a long process of rolling together in a\nbreaking sea, or in the bed of a rapid current, have lost all their\nangles. The pebbles, thus worn, have at length settled,--the heaviest\nlowest,--and the whole has been consolidated into firm rock. \"In many\nplaces,\" says Dr. Pye Smith, \"the upper part of this vast formation is\nof a closer grain, showing that it was produced by the last and finest\ndeposits of clayey and sandy mud, tinged, as the whole is, with oxides\nand carbonates of iron, usually red, but often of other hues. But,\nfrequently, the lower portions, sometimes dispersed heaps, and,\nsometimes, the entire formation, consist of vast masses of conglomerate,\nthe pebbles being composed of quartz, granite, or some other of the\nearliest kinds; and thus showing the previous rocks, from whose\ndestruction they have been composed. Let any person first acquire a\nconception of the extent of this formation, and of its depth, often many\nhundreds, and, sometimes, two or three thousand feet; (but such a\nconception can scarcely be formed without actual inspection;) then let\nhim attempt to follow out the processes which the clearest evidence of\nour senses shows to have taken place; and let him be reluctant and\nsceptical to the utmost that he can, he cannot avoid the impression that\nages innumerable must have rolled over the world, in the making of this\nsingle formation.\"[27]\n\nHere, Fishes are added to the Invertebrate Animals. A sort of Shark with\nthe mouth terminal, instead of beneath the head, was the earliest\nrepresentative of this class. But closely following on this, were some\ncurious species, enveloped in plate mail, and remarkable for the\nsingularity of their forms, as the _Cephalaspis_ and the _Pterichthys_.\n\n[Illustration: CEPHALASPIS.]\n\nThis great period passed away, and was succeeded by that of the\nCarboniferous deposits, indicative of a vast change in the physical\ncharacter of the earth's surface and atmosphere. This change of\ncharacter may be briefly summed up as consisting of an immense abundance\nof lime in the ocean, and of an equally vast charge of carbonic acid in\nthe atmosphere.\n\nStrata of limestone, 2,500 feet in thickness, were accumulated in the\nocean by the labours of Coral-polypes, allied to, but totally distinct\nfrom, those which had previously existed in the primary system. On the\nfloor of a shallow sea, which then occupied the middle of what is now\nEngland, the coral reefs rose perpetually towards the day, atom by atom,\nthe strata on which they were founded slowly and steadily sinking ever\nto a lower level, while successive generations of the industrious\nzoophytes wrought upwards, to maintain their position within reach of\nthe light and warmth. What period of time was requisite for the\naggregation of coral structure to the perpendicular thickness of 2,500\nfeet?\n\nWhile this was going on, other Invertebrata were living in the shallow\nseas, mostly differing from the older species, which had become by this\ntime extinct. Encrinites and Sea-urchins existed; some _Foraminifera_\nwere astonishingly abundant; the _Cephalopoda_ and the _Brachiopoda_\npresented a vast variety of species; and about seventy sorts of Fishes,\nmostly Sharks, characterised the age.\n\nOn the coral limestone lies a sort of conglomerate, known as the\nmillstone grit; and on this is laid that source of Britain's eminence,\nthe _coal_. The coal measures of South Wales are estimated at 12,000\nfeet in thickness. The profusion of vegetable life that must have\ncombined to make the coal in these, has no parallel in this age; no, not\nin the teeming forests of South America, or the great isles of the\nOriental Archipelago. The circumstances which favoured this enormous\ndevelopment of plants, seem never to have been repeated in subsequent\nages, since the coal measures which are found in the later strata are\nthin and inconsiderable, compared with those we are considering.\n\nM. Adolphe Brogniart suggests that in this period, from some source or\nother, carbonic acid was generated in vast abundance; or, at least, that\nit existed in the air, in a far greater proportion than it does now; and\nit is singularly confirmatory of his view, that terrestrial animals, to\nwhich this gas is fatal, have left almost no traces of their existence,\nduring the age of these vast forests--a circumstance otherwise strange\nand unaccountable.\n\n\"Those parts,\" says Mr. Ansted, \"of the great carboniferous series which\ngenerally include the beds of coral, consist of muddy and sandy beds,\nalternating with one another, and with the coal itself. Some of them\nwould appear to be of fresh-water, and some of marine origin; and they\nabound, for the most part, with remains of the leaves of Ferns and\nfern-like trees, together with the crushed trunks of these and other\ntrees, whose substance may have contributed to form the great\naccumulations of bituminised and other vegetable carbon obtained from\nthese strata.\n\n\"It is not easy to communicate such an idea of beds of coal as shall\nenable the reader to understand clearly the nature of the circumstances\nunder which they may have been deposited, and the time required for this\npurpose. The actual total thickness of the different beds in England\nvaries considerably in different districts, but appears to amount, in\nthe Lancashire coal-field, to as much as 150 feet. In North America\nthere is a coal-field of vast extent, in which there appears at least as\ngreat a thickness of workable coal as in any part of England; while in\nBelgium and France the thickness is often much less considerable,\nalthough the beds thicken again still further to the east.\n\n\"But this account of the thickness of the beds gives a very imperfect\nnotion of the quantity of vegetable matter required to form them; and,\non the other hand, the rate of increase of vegetables, and the quantity\nannually brought down by some great rivers, both of the eastern and\nwestern continents, is beyond all measure greater than is the case in\nour drier and colder climate. Certain kinds of trees which contributed\nlargely to the formation of the coal, seem to have been almost entirely\nsucculent, and capable of being squeezed into a small compass during\npartial decomposition. This squeezing process must have been conducted\non a grand scale, both during and after the formation of separate beds;\nand each bed in succession was probably soon covered up by muddy and\nsandy accumulations, now alternating with the coal in the form of shale\nand grit-stone. Sometimes, trunks of trees caught in the mud would be\nretained in a slanting or nearly vertical position, while the sands were\naccumulating round them; sometimes the whole would be quietly buried,\nand soon cease to exhibit any external marks of vegetable origin.[28]\n\n\"To relate the various steps in the formation of a bed of coal, and the\ngradual superposition of one bed upon another, by which at length the\nwhole group of the coal-measures was completed, would involve an amount\nof detail little adapted to these pages; and when it is remembered that\nthe woody fibres, after being deposited, had to be completely changed,\nand the whole character of the vegetable modified, before it could be\nreduced to the bituminous, brittle, almost crystalline mineral now dug\nout of the earth for fuel, it will rather seem questionable whether the\norigin of coal was certainly and necessarily vegetable, than reasonable\nto doubt the importance of the change that has taken place, and the\nexistence of extraordinary means to produce that change. Nothing,\nhowever, is more certain than that all coal was once vegetable; for in\nmost cases woody structure may be detected under the microscope; and\nthis, if not in the coal in its ordinary state, at least in the burnt\nashes which remain after it has been exposed to the action of heat, and\nhas lost its bituminous and semi-crystalline character. This has been\ntoo well and too frequently proved by actual experiment, to require more\nthan the mere statement of the fact.\"[29]\n\nAn eminent practical geologist thus essays to guess the age of the\ncoal-fields, and of the sandstone that underlies it.\n\n\"The great tract of peat near Stirling has demanded [for its formation]\ntwo thousand years; for its registry is preserved by the Roman works\nbelow it. It is but a single bed of coal. Shall we multiply it by 100?\nWe shall not exceed,--far from it,--did we allow 200,000 years for the\nproduction of the coal-series of Newcastle, with all its rocky strata. A\nScottish lake does not shoal at the rate of half a foot in a century;\nand that country presents a vertical depth of far more than 3,000 feet\nin the single series of the oldest sandstone. No sound geologist will\naccuse a computer of exceeding, if he allow 600,000 years for the\nproduction of _this series alone_. And yet what are the coal deposits,\nand what the oldest sandstone, compared to the entire mass of the\nstrata?\"[30]\n\nThe conjecture, that the whole of the vegetable material now\nconstituting the coal, was the growth of the antediluvian centuries, and\nthat it was floated away and deposited by the flood, is untenable. In\nnot a few instances trunks are found broken, and worn by water-action;\nbut the great mass warrants the conclusion that trees of vast dimensions\nand of close array--dense, majestic forests, such as now occur only in\nthe most humid regions of the tropics--were submerged in their native\nabodes, lying where they fell, and where they have left the impressions,\nside by side, on the upper and under surfaces of the shale, of their\ndelicate peculiarities of structure, which would have been totally\nobliterated, if the trees had been sea-borne and shore-rolled, as\npretended. The result of a careful and minute examination of the\nphenomena of coal, by Mr. Binney, is, that the vegetable matter now\nforming coal had grown in vast _marine_ swamps, subjected to a series of\n_subsidences_ with long intervals of repose; that the trees, and perhaps\nsmaller plants, were submerged under _tranquil_ water, in the places of\ntheir growth; and that very inconsiderable portions, if any, of the\nbeds, are owing to drifting.[31]\n\nWhile the coal was in process of deposition, the sea was occupied with\nInvertebrata, not widely differing from those which had marked the\nprevious eras.\n\nFishes, however, were advancing in development; and several new and\nstrange forms, some of them of gigantic dimensions and formidable\narmature, were introduced. These were chiefly remarkable for their\naffinities with Reptiles (whence they are often called _Sauroid_\nFishes); and one of them--_Megalichthys_--was famished with jaws of\nserried teeth, surpassing those of the crocodile. With these were\nassociated other and more ordinary Fishes; and swarms of Sharks of many\nspecies, and varying much in size, roved through the sea, maintaining\nthe same pirate character as their representatives of our modern\nseas--fierce, subtle, voracious, and powerful.\n\nAt this time, too, appeared the earliest Reptiles, chiefly of the\nAmphibia sub-class. Some of these are known only by their foot-prints;\nand the late Hugh Miller has graphically described the appearance of\nsome of these, which, he met with marking the roof of a coal-mine, four\nhundred feet below the surface. These must have been _Batrachia_ of\nlarge size, as the fore feet were thirteen inches apart across the\nbreast.[32] They will be alluded to again.\n\nWith these exceptions, remains of terrestrial animals are, as has\nalready been observed, rare in this formation.\n\n\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE WITNESS FOR THE MACRO-CHRONOLOGY.\n\n(CONTINUED.)\n\n     \"Always distrust very plain cases: beware lest a snake\n     suddenly start out upon you, in the shape of some concealed\n     and utterly unexpected difficulty.\"--WARREN: _Law Studies_.\n\n\nWe have hitherto been considering the strata as if they had remained\npermanent when once deposited, subject to no change, save the successive\nsuperposition of other strata upon them. But this is very far from being\ntrue. Enormous displacements, upheavings, contortions, and fractures,\nare observed in the strata, which tell of mighty forces having been at\nwork upon them after their formation. The explanation of these phenomena\nis due to the internal heat, which ever and anon seems to concentrate\nits action on some special point, seeking and finding vent for itself by\nsome alteration in the already consolidated crust.\n\nSometimes, the mode of action has been the transmission of undulations\nthrough the crust, producing earthquakes, cracking and forcing apart\nstrata already petrified, and bending and variously contorting those\nthat have but partially become solid. Sometimes, the fiery impulse is\nsufficiently concentrated to break through the superincumbent materials,\nforcing a passage for the molten and incandescent rock, which then flows\nforth from the surface, penetrates into the cracks and fissures of the\nfractured strata, and frequently spreads into the hollows and over the\nsummits of the latest formations.\n\nIt is owing to such causes as these, that we find the rocky layers so\noften inclined at various angles to the horizon, instead of being\nparallel to it, as they would be of course deposited; occasionally\nstanding quite perpendicularly, and even to a small extent reversed. The\noutcropping of formations, the long lines of cliff running across a\ncountry in parallel series, (\"crag and tail,\") the dipping of strata\nfrom some central point or ridge, and the non-correspondence between the\nbottom of one stratum and the top of the underlying one,--are all\nphenomena of this sort of powerful action, which has been more or less\nenergetic at all periods.\n\nAfter the deposit of the Old Red Sandstone, the internal fire appears to\nhave enjoyed a lull of its energy, if not a complete cessation, until\nthe Coal Measures were complete. Then the long tranquility was again\nbroken, and concussions so extensive and violent ensued, that hardly a\nsingle square mile of country can anywhere be found which is not full of\nfractured and contorted strata, the record of subterranean movements,\nwhich mostly occurred between the Carboniferous and the Premian\ndeposits.\n\nThe effects of these convulsions were manifest in the changed relations\nof land and sea, existing continents and islands being dislocated,\nsevered, and swallowed up, while others were elevated from the depths of\nthe previous ocean.\n\nIt was from the wave-worn materials thus obtained from pre-existing\nstrata, that the New Red Sandstone was consolidated. It consists chiefly\nof sand and mud, with few organic remains; and the hiatus thus found, in\nanimals and vegetables, seems to be almost a complete one between the\norganisms of the preceding and the succeeding periods.\n\nThe most interesting traces of the earth's tenants during the New Red\nformation, consist of foot-tracks impressed by the progress of animals\nalong the yielding mud between the ranges of high and low tide. They\nafford a remarkable example (not, I think, sufficiently dwelt on) of the\nextreme rapidity with which deposits were consolidated; since the tracks\nmust have been made, and the material consolidated, during the few\nhours, _at most_, that intervened between the recess and the reflux of\nthe tide; since, if the mud had not so soon become solid, the flow of\nthe sea would have instantly obliterated such marks, as it does now on\nour shores.\n\n[Illustration: LABYRINTHODON PACHYGNATHUS.]\n\nThe principal animal, whose foot-prints have been identified, was an\nenormous Frog (_Labyrinthodon_), as big as a hippopotamus, but\napparently allied, in its serried teeth, and in the bony plates with\nwhich it was covered, to the Crocodiles, which were its associates.\n\nIt is curious that marks in the same material have chronicled the\nserpentine trail of a Sea-worm, the scratchings of a Crab, the ripple of\nthe wavelets, and even the drops of a passing shower; the last\nrevealing, by their margins, the direction of the wind by which the\nslanting rain was driven.\n\nIf the Triassic formations display but little evidence of organic\nexistence, the lack is supplied by the abundance of such records, which\nis contained in the Oolitic system, and specially in its lowest\ncomponent,--the Lias. Animals now existed in profusion, but of species\nwhich were for the most part peculiar. The coral-making Polypes existed\nnot (or very rarely) in the seas of that age, but lime was secreted by\nan unusual number of Crinoid Echinoderms, which seem to have fringed the\nrocks and floating pieces of timber, much as Barnacles do now.\n\nAmong the Mollusca now began to appear the inhabitants of those very\nelegant shells, the _Ammonites_, allied to the Nautilus of our Southern\nseas, which may be considered as the lingering representative of those\nswarms of shelled Cephalopoda. They were accompanied by their near\nrelations, the _Belemnites_, more resembling a Cuttle, with a long\ninternal, pointed shell.\n\nFishes, chiefly belonging to a curiously armed tribe of Sharks, together\nwith some enclosed in bony-mail like pavement, were present in the\nshallows, where the Lias was probably deposited.\n\n[Illustration: SNAKE-NECKED MARINE LIZARDS.\n\n_Plesiosaurus dolichodeirus_ and _P. macrocephalus_.]\n\nBut the most characteristic animals were great marine Reptiles, of\nstrange and uncouth forms, to which the present world presents us no\nknown analogy. One of these was the _Ichthyosaurus_, which closely\nresembled a porpoise in form, but thirty or forty feet in length, with\na vertical fish-like tail, and two pairs of paddles; a mouth set with\nstout crocodilian teeth, and enormous eyes. Another form was that of the\n_Plesiosaurus_, scarcely less in size than its fellow, which in the\noutline of its body it resembled: it was distinguished, however, by an\nextraordinary length of neck, slender and swan-like, consisting of\nthirty or forty vertebr\u00e6.\n\nIt adds to the interest of these great marine Reptiles, that around\ntheir fossil skeletons are preserved pellets of excrement (known as\nCoprolites) containing fragments of bone, teeth, and scales of fishes,\nwhich clearly reveal the nature of their food. In some instances, the\nstomach and intestines of these great carnivorous creatures, filled with\nhalf-digested food, have left indubitable traces of their presence _in\nsitu_.\n\nAgain, the geography of the Globe changed. New lands arose from the sea,\nand old lands partially or wholly sank. The German Ocean, and part of\nWestern Europe, of our maps, were a great group of islands. The Oolitic\nformation was deposited. The general character of the organization of\nthis period differed little from that of the Lias. New forms of plants,\nsuch as _Cycade\u00e6_, were abundant, with, considerable numbers of Corals,\nEncrinites, Sea-urchins and Mollusks. Macrurous Crustacea, much like\nthose of our times (but essentially different in species), inhabited the\nsea, and some Beetles and Flies represented the Insects of the land. The\nFishes and Marine Reptiles were pretty much the same with those of the\nLias, though they received some important additions.\n\n[Illustration: MEGALOSAURUS BUCKLANDI.]\n\nIt is, however, among the terrestrial Vertebrata that we must look for\nthe characteristic organisms of this age. And these are, still,\nReptiles. The huge _Megalosaurus_, with a body as big as an elephant's,\nstood high on his legs, and stretched open a pair of gaping jaws, set\nwith jagged teeth. The _Pterodactyles_ flew about,--carnivorous\nlizards, with the body and wings of bats,[33] except that the membrane\nwas stretched upon the enormously developed little finger;--creatures,\nperhaps, the most unlike to anything familiar to us, of all fossil\nforms. And, in the marshy margins of the great river valley which formed\nthe Wealden of our South-eastern districts, the giant _Iguanodon_, and\nhis fellow, the _Hyl\u00e6osaurus_, waged their peaceful warfare on the\nsucculent plants that became their unresisting prey.\n\n[Illustration: BAT-LIZARDS.\n\n_Pterodactylus crassirostris_, and _P. brevirostris_.]\n\n[Illustration: HYL\u00c6OSAURUS ARMATUS.]\n\nThe circle of animal life was completed in this epoch, thus far, that\nevery class was represented by some one or more of its constituent\nspecies. No fossil skeletons of Birds have, indeed, been found so low as\nthe Oolite, but numerous foot-prints of some of the Grallatores are\nfound in a sandstone of this period; and in the Stonesfield slate,\nwhich is contemporary with it, a genus of Mammalia has been\ndiscovered,--a small Marsupial, allied to the Opossums of America.\n\nThe duration of the Oolitic period must have been considerable. \"The\nlias sea-bottom was succeeded first by a sandy, and then by a calcareous\ndeposit, and the animals were modified accordingly.\" The deposit of\ncarbonate of lime, which took place under circumstances that caused it\nto attract around its nodules the organic particles, whence the name\n_oolite_ (egg-stone) is derived, was not continuous, but repeated at\nintervals. The shells of Mollusks were developed in great abundance, and\naccumulations of these formed thick bands, which consolidated into\nlayers of shell-limestone. Three hundred feet of strata, largely\ncomposed of organic remains, were formed before the clay was deposited\nwhich made the Stonesfield and contemporaneous slates.\n\nOnce more the dry land sank, probably by slow successive subsidences,\nand the sea flowed many fathoms deep above the great European\narchipelago. And upon its quiet bottom settled down, first a few sandy\nand clayey beds, and then the great layer of the Chalk.\n\nCreatures of very minute size and low grades of organization were now\nplaying a very important part. A large portion of the lime that was\ndeposited, in the form of a pure carbonate, was doubtless supplied by\nthe Coral structures, which, were exceedingly numerous; the polypidoms\nbeing gnawed down by strong-jawed fishes that fed upon the Zoophytes.\n_Foraminifera_ also were abundant, and contributed to the supply.\n\nNodules of flint exist in the Chalk, sometimes scattered, sometimes\narranged in bands. Two sources are indicated for this substance. One is\nSponge, the most common kinds of which are composed of skeletons of\nsiliceous spicula; and these can be discerned with the microscope in the\ninterior of the chalk-flints. But millions upon millions of Infusoria\nswam through the waters, and many of these were encased in siliceous\nloric\u00e6, while the rocks and sea-weeds were fringed with as incalculably\nnumerous examples of siliceous _Diatomace\u00e6_, whose elegant forms are\nrecognisable without difficulty throughout the Chalk. The inconceivable\nabundance of these forms may be illustrated by the often-cited fact,\nthat whole strata of solid rock appear to be so exclusively composed of\ntheir solid remains, that a cube of one-tenth of an inch is computed by\nEhrenberg to contain five hundred millions of individuals.\n\nThe increase of these organisms is very rapid, and their duration\nproportionately short; but allowing for this, what period would elapse\nbefore the successive generations of entities, of which forty-one\nthousand millions are required to make a cubic inch, would have\naccumulated into solid strata fourteen feet in thickness?\n\nWithout pausing to examine the whole Cretaceous fauna, we may observe\nthat the Mollusca with chambered shells--the Ammonites and their\nallies--were developed in singular variety and profusion during this\nperiod, after which they suddenly disappeared from the ocean. The Fishes\npresent little that is remarkable; of Birds, few, and of Mammals, no\nremains exist; and the Reptiles, while not absolutely extinct, are few\nand rare. One great marine form, however, the _Mosasaurus_, was added to\ntheir number.\n\nAt length the sea ceased to deposit chalk, and its bed appears to have\nbeen slowly elevated, until all the animals that had inhabited the\nwaters of that formation were destroyed; so that their race and\ngeneration perished.[34] The grand epoch of Secondary Formations was\nclosed.\n\nIt was followed by an extensive disruption of the then existing strata,\nand by changes and modifications so great as to alter the whole face of\nnature. \"It would appear that a long period of time elapsed before newer\nbeds were thrown down, since the chalky mud not only had time to harden\ninto chalk, but the surface of the chalk itself was much rubbed and\nworn.\" During this protracted period, eruptions of molten rock occurred\nof enormous extent, producing the Basaltic formation which covers the\nChalk in the north of Ireland, and in some of the Hebrides. In the south\nof Europe the Pyrenees were elevated, and the Apennines and Carpathians\nwere pushed to a greater altitude than before, if they were not then\nformed. The Alps and the Caucasus also experienced a series of upward\nmovements, continuing through a considerable range of the Tertiary\nepoch.\n\nThe rich collections of vegetable remains--chiefly fruits and\nseeds--that have been made from the London Clay, show that the earliest\nland of this period was clothed with a great abundance and variety of\nplants; and these are of such alliances as would now require a tropical\nclimate. Many species of Palms, Screw-pines, Gourds, _Piperace\u00e6_,\n_Mimose\u00e6_, and other _Leguminos\u00e6_, _Malvace\u00e6_, and _Conifer\u00e6_, dropped\ntheir woody pods and fruits where now these pages are written; and the\nanimals manifest no less interesting an approximation to existing forms\nthan the plants. The Zoophytes, the Echinoderms, the Foraminifera, the\nWorms, the Crustacea, the Mollusca, the Fishes and the Reptiles of the\nEocene beds, exhibit a great preponderance of agreement with those that\nnow exist, _so far as genus is concerned_, though the _species_ are\nstill almost wholly distinct. The approximation is particularly marked\nin the Molluscous sub-kingdom, by the almost entire disappearance of the\nhitherto swarming Brachiopod and Cephalopod forms, and the progressive\nsubstitution for them of the _Conchifera_ and _Gastropoda_, which had,\nhowever, throughout the Secondary epoch, been gradually coming forward\nto their present predominance in nature.\n\nAmong the Fishes, the Placoid type was diminished in number; and those\nthat were produced were mostly Sharks and Rays, of modern genera; but\nthe chief difference was the paucity of those mailed forms (Ganoids),\nwhich were so abundant during the Oolitic period. On the other hand, the\nCtenoid and Cycloid forms, which had begun to make their appearance in\nsmall numbers in the Chalk, are well represented. In both this\ndeficiency and this plenitude, there is a very decided approach to\nexisting conditions; for the Ganoids are almost unknown with us, while\nthe last-named two orders are abundant. Representatives of our Perches,\nMaigres, Mackerels, Blennies, Herrings, and Cods, were numerous;\n_distinct, however, from the present species_. But not a single member\nof the great Salmon family was yet introduced.\n\nThe great Saurian Reptiles had entirely disappeared, and were quite\nunrepresented in the tertiary beds, except by a Crocodile or two, and a\nsmall Lizard. Turtles were, however, numerous, both of the marine and\nlacustrine kinds; and there is an interesting stranger, in the form of a\nlarge Serpent, allied to our Pythons, some twenty feet in length.\n\nBirds and Mammals began now to assume their place on the land. The\nLondon Clay presents us with a little Vulture; and the Paris basin\ncontains remnants of species representing the Raptores, the Rasores, the\nGrallatores, and the Natatores.\n\nThe Quadrupeds came in in some force; not developed from the lowest to\nthe highest scale of organization; for the Monkey and the Bat occur in\nsands, certainly not later, if not earlier, than the London Clay,\ncontemporaneously with the Racoon, and before the existence of any\nRodent or Cetacean. Some Carnivora, as the Wolf and the Fox, roamed the\nwoods, but the character of the epoch was given by the Pachyderms.\n\nThese, however, were not the massive colossi that browse in the African\nor Indian jungles of our days; no Elephant, no Rhinoceros, no\nHippopotamus was as yet formed. But several kinds of Tapir wallowed in\nthe morasses; and a goodly number of largish beasts, whose affinities\nwere with the Pachydermata, while their analogies were with the\nRuminantia, served as substitutes for the latter order, which was wholly\nwanting. These interesting quadrupeds, forming the genus\n_Anoplotherium_, were remarkable for two peculiarities,--their feet were\ntwo-toed, and their teeth were ranged in a continuous series, without\nany interval between the incisors and the molars. They varied in size\nfrom that of an ass to that of a hare.\n\nThe physical conditions of our earth, when it was tenanted by these\ncreatures, is thus described:--\"All the great plains of Europe, and the\ndistricts through which the principal rivers now run, were then\nsubmerged; in all probability, the land chiefly extended in a westerly\ndirection, far out into the Atlantic, possibly trending to the south,\nand connecting the western shores of England with the volcanic islands\noff the west coast of Africa. The great mountain chains of Europe, the\nPyrenees, the Alps, the Apennines, the mountains of Greece, the\nmountains of Bohemia, and the Carpathians, existed then only as chains\nof islands in an open sea. Elevatory movements, having an east and west\ndirection, had, however, already commenced, and were producing important\nresults, laying bare the Wealden district in the south-east of England.\nThe southern and central European district, and parts of western Asia,\nwere the recipients of calcareous deposits (chiefly the skeletons of\n_Foraminifera_), forming the Apennine limestone; while numerous islands\nwere gradually lifted above the sea, and fragments of disturbed and\nfractured rock were washed upon the neighbouring shallows or\ncoast-lines, forming beds of gravel covering the Chalk. The beds of\nNummulites and Miliolites, contemporaneous with those containing the\nSheppey plants and the Paris quadrupeds, seem to indicate a deep sea at\nno great distance from shore, and render it probable that there were\nfrequent alternations of elevation and depression, perhaps the result of\ndisturbances acting in the direction already alluded to.\n\n\"The shores of the islands and main land were, however, occasionally low\nand swampy, rivers bringing down mud in what is now the south-east of\nEngland, and the neighbourhood of Brussels, but depositing extensive\ncalcareous beds near Paris. Deep inlets of the sea, estuaries, and the\nshifting mouths of a river, were also affected by numerous alterations\nof level not sufficient to destroy, but powerful enough to modify, the\nanimal and vegetable species then existing; and these movements were\ncontinued for a long time.\"[35]\n\nAfter the elevation of the mountain summits of Europe above the sea, and\nwhile the same causes were still in operation, deposits were being made\nin the narrow intervening seas of the Archipelago, such as the present\nsouth of France, the valleys of the Rhine and Danube, the eastern\ndistricts of England and Portugal. These deposits were partly marine and\npartly lacustrine; the former consisting largely of loose sands, mingled\nwith shells and gravel. In Switzerland is a thick mass of conglomerate;\nand in the district around Mayence, there is a series of fresh-water\nlimestones, and sandstones charged with organic remains.\n\nThe changes which took place during this comparatively recent epoch\nwere not sudden, but gradual; the results of operations which were\nprobably going on without intermission, and perhaps have not yet ceased.\nThe land was more and more upheaved, till at length, what had been an\narchipelago of islands became a continent, and Europe assumed the form\nwhich it bears on our maps.\n\nThe most interesting addition to the natural history of the Miocene, or\nMiddle Tertiary period, was the _Dinotherium_--a huge Pachyderm, twice\nas large as an elephant, with a tapir-like proboscis, and two great\ntusks curving downward from the lower jaw. It was, doubtless, aquatic in\nits habits, and possibly (for its hinder parts are not known), it may\nhave been allied to the Dugong and Manatee, those whale-like Pachyderms,\nwith a broad horizontal tail, instead of posterior limbs.\n\nOther great herbivorous beasts roamed over the new-made land. The\nMastodons, closely allied to the Elephant, had their head-quarters in\nNorth America, but extended also to Europe. And the Elephants\nthemselves, of several species, were spread over the northern\nhemisphere, even to the polar regions. The Hippopotamus, the\nRhinoceros, and other creatures, now exclusively tropical, were also\ninhabitants of the same northern latitudes.\n\n[Illustration: MAMMOTH.]\n\nFrom some specimens of Elephants and Rhinoceroses of this period, which\nseem to have been buried in avalanches, and thus to have been preserved\nfrom decomposition, even of the more transitory parts, as muscle and\nskin, we learn something of the climate that prevailed. The very fact of\ntheir preservation, by the antiseptic power of frost, shows that it was\nnot a tropical climate in which they lived; and the clothing of thick\nwool, fur, and hair, which protected the skin of the Mammoth, or\nSiberian Elephant, tends to the same conclusion. At the same time, those\nregions were not so intensely cold as they are now. For the district in\nwhich the remains of Elephants and their associates are found, in almost\nincredible abundance, is that inhospitable coast of northern Asia which\nbounds the Polar Sea.\n\nThe trees of a temperate climate--the oak, the beech, the maple, the\npoplar, and the birch--which now attain their highest limit somewhere\nabout 70\u00b0 of north latitude, and there are dwarfed to minute shrubs,\nappear then to have grown at the very verge of the polar basin; and that\nin the condition of vast and luxuriant forests, perhaps occupying\nsheltered valleys between mountains whose steep sides were covered with\nsnow, already become perennial, and ever and anon rolling down in\noverwhelming avalanches, such as those which now occasionally descend\ninto the valleys of the Swiss Alps.\n\nThe coast of Suffolk displays a formation known as the Crag--a local\nname for gravel--which rests partly on the chalk; but, as it lies in\nother parts over the London Clay, it is assigned to the later Tertiary,\nor what is called the Pleiocene period. It is divided into the\n_coralline_ and the _red_ crag, the latter being uppermost where they\nexist together, and therefore being the more recent. The Coralline Crag\nis nearly composed of corals and shells, the former almost wholly\nextinct now; but the latter containing upwards of seventy species still\nexisting in the adjacent seas. The Red Crag contains few zoophytes, but\nis remarkable for the remains of at least five species of Whales. Other\nMammalia occur in this formation, among which are the red deer and the\nwild boar of modern Europe.\n\nThe gradual but rapid approximation of the Tertiary fauna to that of the\npresent surface is well indicated by Mr. Lyell's table (1841) of recent\nand fossil species in the English formations:--\n\n                                              Per-centage   No. of\nPeriods.             Localities.                  of        fossils\n                                                recent.    compared.\n\nEocene           {London and Hampshire     }    1 or   2       400\nMiocene          {Red and Coralline        }   20 to  30       450\n                 {  Crag, Suffolk          }\nOlder Pleiocene  {Mamaliferous or Norwich  }   60 to  70       111\n                 {  Crag                   }\nNewer Pleiocene  {Marine strata near       }   85 to  90       160\n                 {  Glasgow                }\nPost Pleiocene   {Fresh-water of the valley}   99 to 100        40\n                 {  of the Thames          }\n\nIt is to this period that are assigned the animals whose bones are found\nin astonishing numbers in limestone caverns, as, for example, that\nnotable one at Kirkdale, in Yorkshire, which was examined by Professor\nBuckland.\n\nThis is a cave in the Oolitic limestone, with a nearly level floor,\nwhich was covered with a deposit of mud, on which an irregular layer of\nsparry stalagmite had formed by the dripping of water from the low roof,\ncarrying lime in solution. Beneath this crust the remains were found.\n\nOf the animals to which the bones belonged, six were _Carnivora_, viz.\n_hy\u00e6na_, _felis_, bear, wolf, fox, weasel; four _Pachydermata_, viz.\nelephant, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, horse; four _Ruminantia_, viz. ox,\nand three species of deer; four _Rodentia_, viz. hare, rabbit,\nwater-rat, mouse; five Birds, viz. raven, pigeon, lark, duck, snipe.\n\nThe bones were almost universally broken; the fragments exhibited no\nmarks of rolling in the water, but a few were corroded; some were worn\nand polished on the convex surface; many indented, as by the canine\nteeth of carnivorous animals. In the cave the peculiar excrement of\nhy\u00e6nas (_album gr\u00e6cum_) was common; the remains of these predacious\nbeasts were the most abundant of all the bones; their teeth were found\nin every condition, from the milk-tooth to the old worn stump; and from\nthe whole evidence Dr. Buckland adopted the conclusion, in which almost\nevery subsequent writer has acquiesced, that Kirkdale Cave was a den of\nhy\u00e6nas during the period when elephants and hippopotami (not of existing\nspecies) lived in the northern regions of the globe, and that they\ndragged into it for food the bodies of animals which frequented the\nvicinity.[36]\n\nThus in these spots we find, observes Professor Ansted, \"written in no\nobscure language, a portion of the early history of our island after it\nhad acquired its present form, while it was clothed with vegetation, and\nwhen its plains and forests were peopled by many of the species which\nstill exist there; but when there also dwelt upon it large carnivorous\nanimals, prowling about the forests by night, and retiring by day to\nthese natural dens.\"\n\nIn our own country, and in many other parts of the world, we find\nfragments of stone distributed over the surface, sometimes in the form\nof enormous blocks, bearing in their fresh angles evidence that they\nhave been little disturbed since their disruption, but sometimes much\nrubbed and worn, and broken into smaller pieces, till they form what is\nknown as gravel. In many cases the original rock from which these\nmasses have been separated does not exist in the vicinity of their\nlocality; and it is not till we reach a distance, often of hundreds of\nmiles, that we find the formation of which they are a component part.\n\nVarious causes have been suggested for the transport of these erratic\nblocks, of which the most satisfactory is the agency of ice, either as\nslow-moving glaciers, or as oceanic icebergs.\n\n\"The common form of a glacier,\" says Professor J. Forbes, \"is a river of\nice filling a valley, and pouring down its mass into other valleys yet\nlower. It is not a frozen ocean, but a frozen torrent. Its origin or\nfountain is in the ramifications of the higher valleys and gorges, which\ndescend amongst the mountains perpetually snow-clad. But what gives to a\nglacier its most peculiar and characteristic feature is, that it does\nnot belong exclusively or necessarily to the snowy region already\nmentioned. The snow disappears from its surface in summer as regularly\nas from that of the rocks which sustain its mass. It is the prolongation\nor outlet of the winter-world above; its gelid mass is protruded into\nthe midst of warm and pine-clad slopes and green-sward, and sometimes\nreaches even to the borders of cultivation.\"[37]\n\nThe glacier moves onward with a slow but steady march towards the mouth\nof its valley. Its lowest stratum carries with it numerous fragments of\nrock, which, pressed by the weight of the mighty mass, scratch and\nindent the surfaces over which they move, and sometimes polish them.\nThese marks are seen on many rock-surfaces now exposed, and they are\ndifficult to explain on any other hypothesis than that of glacial\naction.\n\nBut the alternate influence of summer and winter--the percolation of\nrain into the mountain fissures, and the expansion of freezing--dislodge\ngreat angular fragments of rock, which fall on the glacier beneath.\nSlowly but surely these then ride away towards the mouth of the valley,\ntill they reach a point where the warmth of the climate does not permit\nthe ice to proceed; the blocks then are deposited as the mass melts. But\nif the climate itself were elevated, or if the surface were lowered so\nas to immerse the glacier in the sea, it would melt throughout its\ncourse, and then the blocks would be found arranged in long lines or\n_moraines_, such as we see now in many places.\n\nIf the glacier-valley debouch on the sea, the ice gradually projects\nmore and more, until the motions of the waves break off a great mass,\nwhich floats away, carrying on its surface the accumulation of\nboulders, gravel, and other _d\u00e9bris_ which it had acquired during its\nformation. It is now an iceberg, which, carried by the southern\ncurrents, approaches a warmer climate, melts, and deposits its cargo,\nperhaps hundreds of leagues from the valley where it was shipped, and as\nfresh as when its component _frusta_ were detached from the primitive\nrock.\n\nIf the abundance of such erratic blocks and foreign gravel seem to\nrequire a greater amount of glacial action than is now extant, it has\nbeen suggested that the volcanic energy which elevated Europe may have\nbeen succeeded by a measure of subsidence before the land attained its\npresent permanent condition. Hence there may have been, during the\nTertiary epoch, mountain chains of great elevation, sufficient to supply\nthe glaciers, which, on their subsidence, melted on the spot where they\nwere submerged, or floated away as icebergs on the pelagic currents,\ntill they grounded on the bays and inlets of other shores, which were\nsubsequently elevated again.\n\nThus a large portion of the animals which then inhabited these islands\n(up to that time, perhaps, united to the continent) would be drowned,\nand many species quite obliterated, a few alone remaining to connect our\npresent fauna with that of the submerged area, when the land rose again\nto its existent state.\n\nIt would not materially augment the force of the evidence already\nadduced on the question of chronology, to examine in detail the fossil\nremains of South America, Australia, and New Zealand. The gigantic\nSloths[38] of the first, the gigantic Marsupials of the second, and the\ngigantic Birds of the third, however interesting individually, and\nespecially as showing that a prevailing type governed the fauna in each\nlocality then as now--are all formations of the Tertiary period, and\nsome of them, at least, seem to have run on even into the present epoch.\nIndeed, it is not quite certain that the enormous birds of New Zealand\nand Madagascar are even yet extinct.\n\nThe phenomenon of raised sea-beaches is one of great interest, and seems\nto be connected with the alternate elevations and depressions of the\nTertiary epoch, perhaps marking the successive steps of the upheaval of\nthe land. In several parts of England the coast-line exhibits one or\nmore shelves parallel with the existing sea-beach, and covered with\nsimilar shingle, sand, and sea-shells. And the same phenomenon is\nexhibited on a still more gigantic scale in South America. Mr.\nDarwin[39] found that for a distance of at least 1,200 miles from the\nRio de la Plata to the Straits of Magellan on the eastern side, and for\na still longer distance on the west, the coast-line and the interior\nhave been raised to a height of not less than 100 feet in the northern\npart, but as much as 400 feet in Patagonia. All this change has taken\nplace within a comparatively short period; for in Valparaiso, where the\neffect is most considerable, modern marine deposits, with human remains,\nare seen at the height of 1,300 feet above the sea.\n\nAt what exact point, geologically, the period of human history begins,\nit is impossible to say. No evidence of Man's presence has occurred\nolder than the latest Tertiary deposits, which insensibly merge into\nthe Alluvial. It seems certain that human remains have been found in\nchronological association with those of animals long extinct, and there\nappears no reason to doubt that some species of animals, as the Irish\nDeer, the Moa of New Zealand, and the Dodo of the Mauritius, have\ndisappeared from creation within a period of a few centuries.[40] It is\nnot improbable that the last of the Moho race may have lived only long\nenough to grace the pages of the \"Birds of Australia.\"\n\n[Illustration: THE MOHO.]\n\nIt is as important as it is interesting, to observe that the same kinds\nof physical operations have been, within the present epoch, and are\nstill, going on, as those whose results are chronicled in the rocks.\nStrata of alluvium are constantly being formed on a scale which, though\nit does not _suddenly_ affect the outline of coasts, and therefore\nappears small, yet is great in reality.\n\nThe Ganges is estimated to pour into the Indian Ocean nearly 6,400\nmillions of tons of mud every year; and its delta is a triangle whose\nsides are two hundred miles long. The delta of the Mississippi is of\nabout the same size, and it advances steadily into the Gulf of Mexico at\nthe rate of a mile in a century.\n\nThe accumulation of river-mud is gradually filling up the Adriatic Sea.\nFrom the northernmost point of the Gulf of Trieste to the south of\nRavenna, there is an uninterrupted series of recent accessions of land,\nmore than a hundred miles in length, which, within the last twenty\ncenturies, have increased from two to twenty miles in breadth.\n\nThe coral-polypes are working still with great energy. Mr. Darwin\nmentions two or three examples of the rate of increase, one of which\nonly I shall cite. In the lagoon of Keeling Atoll, a channel was dug for\nthe passage of a schooner built upon the island, through the reef into\nthe sea; in ten years afterward, when it was examined, it was found\nalmost choked up with living coral.\n\nVolcanic action is busy in many parts of the earth, pouring forth clouds\nof ashes and torrents of molten rock; and instances are not wanting in\nwhich new islands have been raised from the bed of the ocean by this\nmeans, within the sphere of history.\n\nSlow and permanent changes of level are still being produced on the\nearth's crust. The bottom of the Baltic has been, for several centuries\nat least, in process of continuous elevation, the effects of which are\npalpable. Many rocks formerly covered are now permanently exposed;\nchannels between islets, formerly used, are now closed up, and beds of\nmarine shells have become bare. On the other hand, the whole area of the\nPacific Polynesia seems subsiding.\n\nDeposits are being made by waters which hold earthy substances in\nsolution. The principal of these is _lime_. Several remarkable examples\nof this kind are quoted by Sir Charles Lyell, in one of which there is a\nthickness of 200 or 300 feet of travertine of recent deposit, while in\nanother a solid mass thirty feet thick was deposited in about twenty\nyears. He also states that there are other countless places in Italy\nwhere the constant formation of limestone may be seen, while the same\nmay be said of Auvergne and other volcanic districts. In the Azores,\nIceland, and elsewhere, _silica_ is deposited often to a considerable\nextent. Deposits of _asphalt_ and other bituminous products occur in\nother places.[41]\n\nThe floors of limestone caverns are frequently strewn with fossil bones,\nwhich are imbedded in stalagmite, and this incrustation is still in\nprogress of formation. It is remarkable that in this deposit alone we\nobtain the bones of Man in a fossil condition. The two creations,--the\nextinct and the extant,--or rather the prochronic and the\ndiachronic--here unite. But there is no line of demarcation between\nthem; they merge insensibly into each other. The bones of Man, and even\nhis implements and fragments of pottery, are found mingled with the\nskeletons of extinct animals in the caves of Devonshire, in those of\nBrazil,[42] and in those of Franconia. In Peru, some scores of human\nskeletons have been found in a bed of travertine, associated with marine\nshells; the stratum itself being covered by a deep layer of vegetable\nsoil, forming the face of a hill crowned with large trees.\n\nFrom a very interesting paper by M. Marcel de Serres, it appears\nindubitable that the existing shells of the Mediterranean are even now\npassing in numbers into the fossil state, and that not in quiet spots\nonly, but where the sea is subject to violent agitations. Specimens of\ncommon species, \"completely petrified, have been converted into\ncarbonate of lime at the same time that they have lost the animal matter\nwhich they originally contained. Their hardness and solidity are greater\nthan those of some petrified species from tertiary formations.\"\n\n\"In the collection of M. Doumet, Mayor of Cette, there exists an anchor\nwhich exhibits the same circumstances, and which is also covered with a\nlayer of solid calcareous matter. This contains specimens of _Pecten_,\n_Cardium_, and _Ostrea_, completely petrified, and the hardness of which\nis equal to that of fossil species from secondary formations. On the\nsurface of the deposit in which the anchor is imbedded, there are\n_Anomi\u00e6_ and _Serpul\u00e6_, which were living when the anchor was got out of\nthe sea; these present no trace of alteration.\"[43]\n\nThus we have brought down the record to an era embraced by human\nhistory, and even to individual experience; and we confidently ask, Is\nit possible, is it imaginable, that the whole of the phenomena which\noccur below the diluvial deposits can have been produced within six\ndays, or seventeen centuries? Let us recapitulate the principal facts.\n\n1. The crust of the earth is composed of many layers, placed one on\nanother in regular order. All of these are solid, and most are of great\ndensity and hardness. Most of them are of vast thickness, the aggregate\nnot being less than from seven to ten miles.\n\n2. The earlier of these were made and consolidated before the newer were\nformed; for in several cases, it is demonstrable that the latter were\nmade out of the _d\u00e9bris_ of the former. Thus the compact and hard\ngranite was disintegrated grain by grain; the component granules were\nrolled awhile in the sea till their angles were rubbed down; they were\nslowly deposited, and then consolidated in layers.\n\n3. A similar process goes on again and again to form other strata, all\noccupying long time, and all presupposing the earlier ones.[44]\n\n4. After some strata have been formed and solidified, convulsions force\nthem upward, contort them, break them, split them asunder. Melted matter\nis driven through the outlets, fills the veins, spreads over the\nsurface, settles into the hollows, cools and solidifies.\n\n5. After the outflowing and consolidation of these volcanic streams, the\naction of running water cuts them down, cleaving beds of immense depth\nthrough their substance. Mr. Poulett Scrope, speaking of the solidified\nstreams of basalt, in the volcanic district of Southern France,\nobserves:--\n\n     \"These ancient currents have since been corroded by rivers,\n     which have worn through a mass of 150 feet in height, and\n     formed a channel even in the granite rocks beneath, since\n     the lava first flowed into the valley. In another spot, a\n     bed of basalt, 160 feet high, has been cut through by a\n     mountain stream. The vast excavations effected by the\n     erosive power of currents along the valleys which feed the\n     Ard\u00e8che, since their invasion by lava-currents, prove that\n     even the most recent of these volcanic eruptions belong to\n     an era incalculably remote.\"[45]\n\n6. A series of organic beings appears, lives, generates, dies; lives,\ngenerates, dies; for thousands and thousands of successive generations.\nTiny polypes gradually build up gigantic masses of coral,--mountains and\nreefs--microscopic foraminifera accumulate strata of calcareous sand;\nstill more minute infusoria--forty millions to the inch--make slates,\nmany yards thick, of their shells alone.\n\n7. The species at length die out--a process which we have no data to\nmeasure,[46] though we may reasonably conclude it very long. Sometimes\nthe whole existing fauna seems to have come to a sudden violent end; at\nothers, the species die out one by one. In the former case suddenly, in\nthe latter progressively, new creatures supply the place of the old. Not\nonly do species change; the very genera change, and change again. Forms\nof beings, strange beings, beings of uncouth shape, of mighty ferocity\nand power, of gigantic dimensions, come in, run their specific race,\npropagate their kinds generation after generation,--and at length die\nout and disappear; to be replaced by other species, each approaching\nnearer and nearer to familiar forms.\n\n8. Though these early creatures were unparalleled by anything existing\nnow, yet they were animals of like structure and economy essentially. We\ncan determine their analogies and affinities; appoint them their proper\nplaces in the orderly plan of nature, and show how beautifully they\nfill hiatuses therein. They had shells, crusts, plates, bones, horns,\nteeth, exactly corresponding in structure and function to those of\nrecent animals. In some cases we find the young with its milk-teeth by\nthe side of its dam with well-worn grinders. The fossil excrement is\nseen not only dropped, but even in the alimentary canal. Bones bear the\nmarks of gnawing teeth that dragged them and cracked them, and fed upon\nthem. The foot-prints of birds and frogs, of crabs and worms, are\nimprinted in the soil, like the faithful impression of a seal.[47]\n\n9. Millions of forest-trees sprang up, towered to heaven, and fell, to\nbe crushed into the coal strata which make our winter fires. Hundreds\nof feet measure the thickness of what were once succulent plants, but\npressed together like paper-pulp, and consolidated under a weight\nabsolutely immensurable. Yet there remain the scales of their stems, the\nelegant reticulated patterns of their bark, the delicate tracery of\ntheir leaf-nerves, indelibly depicted by an unpatented process of\n\"nature-printing.\" And when we examine the record,--the forms of the\nleaves, the structure of the tissues, we get the same result as before,\nthat the plants belonged to a flora which had no species in common with\nthat which adorns the modern earth. Very gradually, and only after many\nsuccessions, not of individual generations, but of the cycles of\nspecies, genera, and even families, did the vegetable creation conform\nitself to ours.[48]\n\n10. At length the species both of plants and animals grew,--not by\nalteration of their specific characters, but by replacement of species\nby species--more and more like what we have now on the earth, and\nfinally merged into our present flora and fauna, about the time when we\nfind the first geological traces of MAN.\n\n11. During the course of these successive cycles of organic life, the\nmap of the world has changed many times. Up to a late period the ocean\nwashed over Mont Blanc and Mount Ararat; the continent of Europe was a\nwide sea; then it was a Polynesia, then an Archipelago of great islands,\nthen a Continent much larger than it is now, with England united to it,\nand the solid land stretching far away into the Atlantic;--then it sank\nagain, and was again raised, not all at once, but by several stages,\neach of which has left its coast line, and its shingle beach. All these\nchanges must have been the work of vast periods of time.\n\n\"Excepting possibly, but not certainly, the higher parts of some\nmountains, which at widely different epochs have been upheaved, and made\nto elevate and pierce the stratified masses which once lay over them,\nthere is scarcely a spot on the earth's surface which has not been many\ntimes in succession the bottom of the sea, and a portion of dry land.\nIn the majority of cases, it is shown, by physical evidences of the most\ndecisive kind, that each of those successive conditions was of extremely\nlong duration; a duration which it would be presumptuous to put into any\nestimate of years or centuries; for any alteration, of which vestiges\noccur in the zoological state and the mineral constitution of the\nearth's present surface, furnishes no analogy (with regard to the nature\nand continuance of causes), that approaches in greatness of character to\nthose changes whose evidences are discernible in almost any two\ncontinuous strata. It is an inevitable inference, unless we are disposed\nto abandon the principles of fair reasoning, that each one of such\nchanges in organic life did not take place till after the next preceding\ncondition of the earth had continued through a duration, compared with\nwhich six thousand years appear an inconsiderable fraction of time.\"[49]\n\n12. The climate of our atmosphere has undergone corresponding mutations.\nAt one time the Palms, the Treeferns, the Cycads of the tropical jungles\nfound their congenial home here: the Elephant, the Rhinoceros, and the\nTiger roamed over England; nay, dwelt in countless hosts on the\nnorthern shores of Siberia: then the climate gradually cooled to a\ntemperate condition: then it became cold, and glaciers and icebergs were\nits characteristic features: finally it became temperate again.\n\n13. The icebergs and the glaciers were the ships and railways of past\nepochs; they were freighted with their heavy but worthless cargoes of\nrock-boulders and gravel, and set out on their long voyages and travels,\nover sea and land, sometimes writing their log-books in ineffaceable\nscratches on the rocky tables over which they passed, and at length\ndischarging their freights in harbours and bays, on inland plains, on\nmountain sides and summits, where they remain unclaimed, free for any\ntrader in such commodities, without the ceremony of producing the\noriginal bill of lading.\n\nLet the remainder be told in the words of one of our most eloquent and\nable geologists, Professor Sedgwick.\n\n\"The fossils demonstrate the time to have been _long_, though we cannot\nsay _how_ long. Thus we have generation after generation of shell-fish,\nthat have lived and died on the spots where we find them; very often\n_demonstrating_ the lapse of _many years_ for a few perpendicular inches\nof deposit. In some beds we have large, cold-blooded reptiles,\ncreatures of long life. In others, we have traces of ancient forests,\nand enormous fossil trees, with concentric rings of structure, marking\nthe years of growth. Phenomena of this kind are repeated again and\nagain; so that we have three or four distinct systems of deposit, each\nformed at a distinct period of time, and each, characterised by its\npeculiar fossils. Coeval with the Tertiary masses, we have enormous\nlacustrine deposits; sometimes made up of very fine thin lamin\u00e6, marking\nslow tranquil deposits. Among these lamin\u00e6, we can find sometimes the\nleaf-sheddings and the insects of successive seasons. Among them also we\nfind almost mountain-masses of the _Indusioe tubulatoe_ [the cases\nof _Phryganeoe_], and other sheddings of insects, year after year.\nAgain, streams of ancient lava alternate with some of these lacustrine\ntertiary deposits.\n\n\"In central France, a great stream of lava caps the lacustrine\nlimestone. At a _subsequent period_ the waters have excavated deep\nvalleys, cutting down into the lacustrine rock-marble many hundred feet;\nand, at a newer epoch, anterior to the authentic history of Europe, new\ncraters have opened, and fresh streams of lava have run down the\nexisting valleys. Even in the Tertiary period we have thus a series of\ndemonstrative proofs of a long succession of physical events, each of\nwhich required a long lapse of ages for its elaboration.\n\n\"Again, as we pass downwards from the bottom Tertiary beds to the Chalk,\nwe instantly find new types of organic life. The old species, which\nexist in millions of individuals in the upper beds, disappear, and new\nspecies are found in the chalk immediately below. This fact indicates a\nlong lapse of time. Had the chalk and upper beds been formed\nsimultaneously at the same period [as the supporters of the diluvial\ntheory represent], their organic remains must have been more or less\nmixed; but _they are not_. Again, at the base of the Tertiary deposits\nresting on the Chalk, we often find great masses of conglomerate or\nshingle, made up of chalk-flints rolled by water. These separate the\nChalk from the overlying beds, and many of the rolled flints contain\ncertain petrified _chalk_-fossils. Now, every such fossil proves the\nfollowing points:--\n\n     \"1. There was a time when the organic body was alive at the\n     bottom of the sea.\n\n     \"2. It was afterwards imbedded in the cretaceous deposit.\n\n     \"3. It became petrified; a very slow process.\n\n     \"4. The Chalk was, by some change of marine currents, washed\n     away, or degraded, [_i. e._ worn away under the atmosphere\n     by the weather and casualties, a process slow almost beyond\n     description,] and the solid flints and fossils [thus\n     detached from their imbeddings], were rolled into shingles.\n\n     \"5. Afterwards, these shingles were covered up, and buried\n     under Tertiary deposits.\n\n     \"In this way of interpretation, a section of _a few\n     perpendicular feet_ indicates a LONG lapse of time, and the\n     co-ordinate fact of the entire change of organic types,\n     between the beds above and those below, falls in with the\n     preceding inference, and shows the lapse of time to have\n     been VERY LONG.\"[50]\n\n\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE CROSS-EXAMINATION.\n\n     \"When the fact itself cannot be proved, that which comes\n     nearest to the proof of the fact is the proof of the\n     circumstances that necessarily and usually attend such\n     facts; and _these are called presumptions, and not proofs_,\n     for they stand instead of the proofs of the fact, till the\n     contrary be proved.\"--GILBERT; LAW OF EVIDENCE.\n\n\nSuch, then, is the evidence for the macro-chronology. I hope I have\nsummed it up fairly; of course, many details I have been forbidden to\nadduce by want of space, but they would have been of the same kind as\nthose brought forward. I am not conscious of having in any degree\ncushioned, or concealed, or understated a single proof which would have\nhelped the conclusion.\n\nA mighty array of evidence it certainly is, and such as appears at first\nsight to compel our assent to the sequent claimed for it. I must confess\nthat I have no sympathy with the _reasonings_ of those, however I honour\ntheir design, who can find a sufficient cause for these phenomena in the\nnatural operations of the Antediluvian centuries, or in the convulsion\nthat closed them.\n\nBut is there no other alternative? Am I compelled to accept the\nconclusions drawn from the phenomena thus witnessed unto, as undeniable\nfacts, since they refuse to be normally circumscribed within the limits\nof the historic period? I verily believe there is another, and a\nperfectly legitimate solution.\n\nMy first business is to examine, and, if I can, to disprove this\ntestimony. If I can show the witness to be liable to error; if I can\nadduce a principle which invalidates all his proofs; if I can make it\nundeniably manifest that, in a case precisely parallel, similar\nconclusions, deduced from exactly analogous phenomena, would be\nnotoriously false; if I can do this, I think I have a right to demand\nthat the witness be bowed out of court, as perfectly nugatory and\nworthless _in this cause_.\n\nIn the first place, there is nothing here but _circumstantial_ evidence;\nthere is no _direct_ testimony to the facts sought to be established.\nLet it not seem unfair to make this distinction; it is one of great\nimportance. No witness has deposed to actual observation of the\nprocesses above enumerated; no one has appeared in court who declares\nhe actually saw the living _Pterodactyle_ flying about, or heard the\nwinds sighing in the tops of the _Lepidodendra_. You will say, \"It is\nthe same thing; we have seen the skeleton of the one, and the crushed\ntrunk of the other, and therefore we are as sure of their past existence\nas if we had been there at the time.\" No, it is not the same thing; it\nis not _quite_ the same thing; NOT QUITE. Strong as is the evidence, it\nis not _quite_ so strong as if you had actually seen the living things,\nand had been conscious of the passing of time while you saw them live.\nIt is only by a process of reasoning that you infer they lived at\nall.[51]\n\nThe process is something like this. Here is an object in a mass of\nstone, which has a definite form,--the form of the bone of a beast. The\nmore minutely you examine it, the more points of resemblance you find;\nyou say, If this is a bone, it ought to have so and so--condyles, scars\nfor the attachment of muscles in particular spots, a cavity for the\nreception of marrow, a mark for the insertion of the ligament; you look\nfor each of these, and find all in the very conditions you have\nprescribed; it is not only a bone, but a particular bone, the\nthigh-bone, for instance. Here in the same block of stone is another\nobject: you work it out; it is another bone; its joint accurately fits\nthe preceding; it answers precisely to the tibia of a mammal. Other\nbones at length appear, and you have got a perfect skeleton, no part\nredundant, none wanting; the most minute, the most elaborate, the most\ndelicate portions of the osseous frame of a mammal are present, and\nevery one exactly correspondent to the rest in size, in maturity, _in\nfit._ Each bone, out of the scores, displays exactly those characters,\nand no other, which an anatomist would have said beforehand it ought to\nhave. Allowing for the difference of species, the skeleton, when worked\nout of its matrix, and set up, is precisely like that of the little\nbeast at whose death you were actually present, whose bones you cleaned\nwith your own hands, and mounted for your own museum. It would be as\nreasonable to deny that the one is the skeleton of a real animal as the\nother.\n\nThus far there is matter of fact--observed, witnessed fact; you have\nfound in a stone a real skeleton.\n\nYou immediately infer that this skeleton once belonged to a living\nanimal, that breathed, and fed, and walked about, exactly as animals do\nnow. This conclusion seems so obvious and unavoidable, that we naturally\nconclude it to rest on the same foundation as the fact that the object\n_is_ a skeleton, or that _it was_ in the stone. But really it rests on a\ntotally different foundation; it is a conclusion deduced by a process of\nreasoning from certain assumed premises.\n\nMyriads, perhaps millions of skeletons of animals like this one have\ncome at different times under human observation, which have been\nobviously referrible to creatures that, within the same sphere of\nobservation, had been alive. No similar skeleton has ever come within\nthe range of recorded observation that could be referred to any other\nsource than that of a quondam living animal. On these premises you build\nthe conclusion that a skeleton must, at some time or other, have\nbelonged to a living animal. And it may seem an impregnable position;\nbut yet its validity altogether depends on the exhaustive power of human\nobservation. If I could show, to your satisfaction, that a skeleton\nmight have existed; still more, if I could show you that a skeleton\n_must_ have existed; still more, if I could prove that myriads of\nskeletons, precisely like this, must have existed, without ever having\nformed parts of antecedent living bodies; you would yourself acknowledge\nthat your conclusions were untenable. The utmost you could affirm, would\nbe, that possibly, perhaps probably, the skeleton you had found in the\nstone had at some time belonged to a living animal, but that, so far as\nany recognised premises exist, there was no certainty about it.\n\nBut the premises have not been fairly stated. There is more than the\nrelation of precedence and sequence in what we know of the connexion\nbetween skeletons and living animals; there is the relation of cause and\neffect. It is not only that universal experience has declared the _fact_\nthat every skeleton was once part of a living body; it has shown that\nthe very structure and nature of the skeleton _implied_ living body. The\nskeleton, in every part, displays a regard for the advantages of the\nliving animal; it is built expressly for it; by itself it is nothing--a\nmachine without any object; its joints, its cavities, its apophyses, its\nprocesses, all have special reference to tissues and organs which are\nnot here now, but which belong to the living body.\n\nAnd then experience has shown that the skeleton is made in a particular\nmanner. The bone is deposited, atom by atom, in living organic cells,\nwhich are formed by living blood, which implies a living animal. The\nmicroscopic texture of your stone-girt skeleton does not differ from\nthat of the skeleton which you cleaned from the muscles with your own\nhands; and therefore you infer that it was constructed in the same way,\nnamely, by the blood of a living body.\n\nWell, I come back, notwithstanding, to my position,--that your right to\n_affirm_ this must altogether depend on the exhaustive power of that\nexperience on which you build. And it will be overthrown, if I can show\nthat skeletons have been made in some other way than by the agency of\nliving blood.\n\nCan I do this? I think I can. At least I think I can show enough greatly\nto diminish, if not altogether to destroy, the confidence with which you\ninferred the existence of vast periods of past time from geological\nphenomena. I can adduce a principle, having the universality (within its\nproper sphere) of LAW, hitherto unrecognised, whose tendency is to\ninvalidate the testimony of your witness.\n\n\n\n\n\nV.\n\nPOSTULATES.\n\n\"A little philosophy inclineth a man's mind to atheism; but depth in\nphilosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of\nman looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them,\nand go no farther; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate\nand linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity.\"--BACON.\n\n     \"'What was the opinion of Pythagoras concerning wildfowl?'\n     'That the soul of our grand-dam might haply inhabit a bird.'\n     'What thinkest thou of his opinion?'\n     'I think nobly of the soul, and in nowise receive his opinion.'\"\n\n     SHAKSPEARE.\n\n\nAs without some common ground it is impossible to reason, I shall take\nfor granted the two following principles:--\n\n     I. THE CREATION OF MATTER.\n\n     II. THE PERSISTENCE OF SPECIES.\n\nI. If any geologist take the position of the necessary eternity of\nmatter, dispensing with a Creator, on the old ground, _ex nihilo nihil\nfit_,--I do not argue with him. I assume that at some period or other in\npast eternity there existed nothing but the Eternal God, and that He\ncalled the universe into being out of nothing.\n\nII. I demand also, in opposition to the development hypothesis, the\nperpetuity of specific characters, from the moment when the respective\ncreatures were called into being, till they cease to be. I assume that\neach organism which the Creator educed was stamped with an indelible\nspecific character, which made it what it was, and distinguished it from\neverything else, however near or like. I assume that such character has\nbeen, and is, indelible and immutable; that the characters which\ndistinguish species from species _now_, were as definite at the first\ninstant of their creation as now, and are as distinct now as they were\nthen. If any choose to maintain, as many do, that species were gradually\nbrought to their present maturity from humbler forms,--whether by the\nforce of appetency in individuals, or by progressive development in\ngenerations--he is welcome to his hypothesis, but I have nothing to do\nwith it. These pages will not touch him.\n\nI believe, however, there is a large preponderance of the men of\nscience,[52] at least in this country, who will be at one with me here.\nThey acknowledge the almighty _fiat_ of God, as the energy which\nproduced being; and they maintain that the specific character which He\nthen stamped on his organic creation remains unchangeable.\n\n\n\n\nVI.\n\nLAWS.\n\n     \"----[Greek: ton trochon t\u00eas genese\u00f4s].\"--JAMES iii. 6.\n\n\nThe course of nature is a circle. I do not mean the _plan_ of nature; I\nam not speaking of a circular arrangement of species, genera, families,\nand classes, as maintained by MacLeay, Swainson, and others. Their\ntheories may be true, or they may be false; I decide nothing concerning\nthem; I am not alluding to any _plan_ of nature, but to its _course_,\n_cursus_,--the way in which it _runs on_. This is a circle.\n\nHere is in my garden a scarlet runner. It is a slender twining stem some\nthree feet long, beset with leaves, with a growing bud at one end, and\nwith the other inserted in the earth. What was it a month ago? A tiny\nshoot protruding from between two thick fleshy leaves scarcely raised\nabove the ground. A month before that? The thick fleshy leaves were two\noval cotyledons, closely appressed face to face, with the minute\nplumule between them, the whole enclosed in an unbroken,\ntightly-fitting, spotted, leathery coat. It was a bean, a seed.\n\n[Illustration: GERMINATION OF A SCARLET RUNNER.\n\n     _a._ The ripe bean, showing the hilum at *;\n     _b._ The same bean, with one cotyledon removed, to show the plumule.\n     _c._ A similar bean, twenty-four hours after planting.\n     _d._ The same, on the sixth day after planting.\n     _e._ The same, on the twelfth day.\n     _f._ The same, on the fourteenth day.\n\nN.B. From _b_, _c_, _d_, _e_, the front cotyledon has been cut away, to\nshow the progress of the plumule.]\n\nWas this the commencement of its existence? O no! Six months earlier\nstill it was snugly lying, with several others like itself, in a green\nfleshy pod, to the interior of which it was organically attached. A\nmonth before that, this same pod with its contents was the centre of a\nscarlet butterfly-like flower, the bottom of its pistil, within which,\nif you had split it open, you would have discerned the tiny beans, whose\nhistory we are tracing backwards, each imbedded in the soft green\ntissue, but no bigger than the eye of a cambric needle.\n\nBut where was this flower? It was one of many that glowed on my garden\nwall all through last summer; each cluster springing as a bud from a\nslender twining stem, which was the exact counterpart of that with which\nwe commenced this little life-history.\n\nAnd this earlier stem,--what of it? It too had been a shoot, a pair of\ncotyledons with a plumule, a seed, an integral part of a carpel, which\nwas a part of an earlier flower, that expanded from an earlier bud, that\ngrew out of an earlier stem, that had been a still earlier seed, that\nhad been--and backward, _ad infinitum_, for aught that I can perceive.\n\nThe course, then, of a scarlet runner is a circle, without beginning or\nend:--that is, I mean, without a natural, a normal beginning or end. For\nat what point of its history can you put your finger, and say, \"Here is\nthe commencement of this organism, before which there is a blank; here\nit began to exist?\" There is no such point; no stage which does not look\nback to a previous stage, on which _this_ stage is inevitably and\nabsolutely dependent.\n\nTo some of my readers this may be rendered more clear by the\naccompanying diagram:----\n\n[Illustration: legume--reed--cotyledons--shoot--stem--bud--flower--carpel]\n\n[Illustration: theca--spore--prothallus--sporal\nfrond--tuft--caudex--fertile frond--sorus]\n\nSee that magnificent tuft of Lady-fern on yonder bank, arching its\nexquisitely cut fronds so elegantly on every side. A few years ago this\nample crown was but a single small frond, which you would probably not\nhave recognised as that of a Lady-fern. Somewhat earlier than this, the\nplant was a minute flat green expansion (_prothallus_), of no definite\noutline, very much like a Liverwort. This had been previously a\nthree-sided spore lying on the damp earth, whither it had been jerked by\nthe rupture of a capsule (_theca_). For this spore, though so small as\nto be visible only by microscopic aid, had a previous history, which may\nbe traced without difficulty. It was generated with hundreds more, in\none of many capsules, which, were crowded together, beneath the oval bit\nof membrane, that covered one of the brown spots (_sori_), which were\ndeveloped in the under surface of the fronds of an earlier Lady-fern.\nThat earlier individual had in turn passed through the same stages of\nsporal frond, prothallus, spore, theca, sorus, frond, prothallus, spore,\ntheca, sorus, frond, prothallus, &c.--_ad infinitum_.\n\nThis sounding-winged Hawkmoth, which like a gigantic bee is buzzing\naround the jasmine in the deepening twilight, hovering ever and anon to\nprobe the starry flowers that make the evening air almost palpable with\nfragrance,--this moth, what \"story of a life\" can he tell? Nearly a year\nof existence he has spent as a helpless, almost motionless pupa, buried\nin the soft earth, from whence he has emerged but this evening. About a\ntwelvemonth ago he was a great fat green caterpillar with an arching\nhorn over his rump, working ever harder and harder at devouring poplar\nleaves, and growing ever fatter and fatter. But before that he had one\nday burst forth a little wriggling worm, from a globular egg glued to a\nleaf. Whence came the egg? It was developed within the ovary of a parent\nHawkmoth, whose history is but an endless rotation of the same\nstages,--pupa, larva, egg, moth, pupa, larva, &c. &c.\n\n[Illustration: larva--pupa--moth--egg]\n\nBehold this specimen of _Plumularia_, a shrub-like zoophyte, comprising\nwithin its populous branches some twenty thousand polypes. Every\nindividual cell, now inhabited by its tentacled Hydra, has in its turn\nbudded out from a branch, which was itself but a lateral process from\nthe central axis. And this was but the prolongation of what was at first\na single cell, shooting up from a creeping root-thread. A little earlier\nthan this, there was neither cell nor root-thread, but the organism\nexisted in the form of a _planule_, a minute soft-bodied, pear-shaped\nworm, covered with cilia, that crawled slowly over the stones and\nsea-weeds. Whence came it? A few hours before, it had emerged from the\nmouth of a vase-like cell, one of the ovarian capsules, which studded\nthe stem of an old well-peopled Plumularia-shrub, and which had been\ngradually developed from its substance by a process analogous to\nbudding. And then if we follow the history of this earlier shrub\nbackward, it will only lead us through exactly correspondent stages,\nprimal cell, planule, ovarian capsule, stem, and so on interminably.\n\n[Illustration: primal cell--axis--branch--polype--capsule--planule]\n\nOnce more. The cow that peacefully ruminates under the grateful shadow\nof yonder spreading beech, was, a year or two ago, a gamesome heifer\nwith budding horns. The year before, she was a bleating calf, which\nagain had been a breathless foetus wrapped up in the womb of its\nmother. Earlier still it had been an unformed embryo; and yet earlier,\nan embryonic vesicle, a microscopically minute cell, formed out of one\nof the component cells of a still earlier structure,--the germinal\nvesicle of a fecundated ovum. But this ovum, which is the remotest point\nto which we can trace the history of our cow as an individual, was,\nbefore it assumed a distinct individuality, an undistinguishable\nconstituent of a viscus,--the ovary,--of another cow, an essential part\nof _her_ structure, a portion of the tissues of _her_ body, to be traced\nback, therefore, through all the stages which I have enumerated above,\nto the tissues of another parent cow, thence to those of a former, and\nso on, through a vista of receding cows, as long as you choose to follow\nit.\n\n[Illustration: embryo--foetus--calf--heifer--cow--ovum--germ.\nvesicle--embr. vesicle]\n\nThis, then, is the order of all organic nature. When once we are in any\nportion of the course, we find ourselves running in a circular groove,\nas endless as the course of a blind horse in a mill. It is evident that\nthere is no one point in the history of any single creature, which is a\nlegitimate beginning of existence. And this is not the law of some\nparticular species, but of all: it pervades all classes of animals, all\nclasses of plants, from the queenly palm down to the protococcus, from\nthe monad up to man: the life of every organic being is whirling in a\nceaseless circle, to which one knows not how to assign any\ncommencement,--I will not say any certain or even probable, but any\n_possible_, commencement. The cow is as inevitable a sequence of the\nembryo, as the embryo is of the cow. Looking only at nature, or looking\nat it only with the lights of experience and reason, I see not how it is\npossible to avoid one of these two theories, the development of all\norganic existence out of gaseous elements, or the eternity of matter in\nits present forms.\n\nCreation, however, solves the dilemma. I have, in my postulates, begged\nthe fact of creation, and I shall not, therefore, attempt to prove it.\nCreation, the sovereign fiat of Almighty Power, gives us the commencing\npoint, which we in vain seek in nature. But what is creation? It is _the\nsudden bursting into a circle_. Since there is no one stage in the\ncourse of existence, which, more than any other affords a natural\ncommencing point, whatever stage is selected by the arbitrary will of\nGod, must be an unnatural, or rather a preter-natural, commencing point.\n\nThe life-history of every organism commenced at some point or other of\nits circular course. It was created, called into being, in some definite\nstage. Possibly, various creatures differed in this respect; perhaps\nsome began existence in one stage of development, some in another; but\nevery separate organism had a distinct point at which it began to live.\nBefore that point there was nothing; this particular organism had till\nthen no existence; its history presents an absolute blank; _it was not_.\n\nBut the whole organisation of the creature thus newly called into\nexistence, looks back to the course of an endless circle in the past.\nIts whole structure displays a series of developments, which as\ndistinctly witness to former conditions as do those which are presented\nin the cow, the butterfly, and the fern, of the present day. But what\nformer conditions? The conditions thus witnessed unto, as being\nnecessarily implied in the present organisation, were non-existent; the\nhistory was a perfect blank till the moment of creation. The past\nconditions or stages of existence in question, can indeed be as\ntriumphantly inferred by legitimate deduction from the present, as can\nthose of our cow or butterfly; they rest on the very same evidences;\nthey are identically the same in every respect, except in this one, that\nthey were _unreal_. They exist only in their results; they are effects\nwhich never had causes.\n\nPerhaps it may help to clear my argument if I divide the past\ndevelopments of organic life, which are necessarily, or at least\nlegitimately, inferrible from present phenomena, into two categories,\nseparated by the violent act of creation. Those unreal developments\nwhose apparent results are seen in the organism at the moment of its\ncreation, I will call _prochronic_, because time was not an element in\nthem; while those which have subsisted since creation, and which have\nhad actual existence, I will distinguish as _diachronic_, as occurring\nduring time.\n\nNow, again I repeat, there is no imaginable difference to sense between\nthe prochronic and the diachronic development. Every argument by which\nthe physiologist can prove to demonstration that yonder cow was once a\nfoetus in the uterus of its dam, will apply with exactly the same\npower to show that the newly created cow was an embryo, some years\nbefore its creation.\n\nLook again at the diagram by which I have represented the life-history\nof this animal. The only mode in which it can begin is by a sudden\nsovereign act of power, an irruption into the circle. You may choose\n_where_ the irruption shall occur; there must be a bursting-in at some\npoint. Suppose it is at \"calf;\" or suppose it is at \"embr. vesicle.\" Put\na wafer at the point you choose, say the latter. This then is the real,\nactual commencement of a circle, to be henceforth ceaseless. But the\nembryonic vesicle necessarily implies a germinal vesicle, and this\nnecessitates an ovum, and the ovum necessitates an ovary, and the ovary\nnecessitates an entire animal,--and thus we have got a quarter round the\ncircle in back development; we are irresistibly carried along the\nprochronic stages,--the stages of existence which were before existence\ncommenced,--as if they had been diachronic, actually occurring within\nour personal experience.\n\nIf I know, as a _historic fact_, that the circle was commenced where I\nhave put my wafer, I may begin it there; but there is, and can be,\nnothing in the _phenomena_ to indicate a commencement there, any more\nthan anywhere else, or, indeed, anywhere at all. The commencement, as a\nfact, I must learn from testimony; I have no means whatever of inferring\nit from phenomena.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nPermit me, therefore, to repeat, as having been proved, these two\npropositions:--\n\nALL ORGANIC NATURE MOVES IN A CIRCLE.\n\n<sc>Creation is a violent irruption into the circle of nature.</sc>\n\n\n\n\n\nVII.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Plants._)\n\n     \"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?\n     declare, if thou hast understanding.\"--JOB xxxviii. 4.\n\n\nSince every organism, considering it, throughout its generations, as an\nunit, has been created, or made to commence existence, it is manifest\nthat it was created or made to commence existence at some moment of\ntime. I will ask some kind geological reader to imagine that moment, and\nto accompany me in an ideal tour of inspection among the creatures,\ntaking up each for examination at the instant that it has been called\ninto existence. Do not be alarmed! I am not about to assume that the\nmoment in question was six thousand years ago, and no more; I will not\nrule the actual date at all; you, my geological friend, shall settle the\nchronology just as you please, or, if you like it better, we will leave\nthe chronological date out of the inquiry, as an element not relevant to\nit. It may have been six hundred years ago, or six thousand, or sixty\ntimes six millions; let it for the present remain an indeterminate\nquantity. Only please to remember that the date _was_ a reality, whether\nwe can fix it or not; it _was_ as precise a moment as the moment in\nwhich I write this word.\n\nWell then, like two of those \"morning stars\" who, when \"the foundations\nwere fastened,\" \"shouted for joy,\" we will, in imagination, take our\nstand on this round world at exactly ---- minutes past ---- o'clock, on\nthe morning of the ----th of ----, in the year B.C. ----. The noble\nTree-fern before us (_Alsophila aculeata_) has this instant been called\ninto being by the creating voice of God. Here it stands, lifting up its\ncolumnar stem, and spreading its minutely fretted fronds all around, in\na vaulted canopy above our heads, through the filagree work of whose\nexpanse the sunbeams play in a soft green radiance. It has this instant\nbeen created.\n\nBut I will suppose, further, that we have the power to call into our\ncouncil some experienced botanist; who is not acquainted, as we are,\nwith the fact of this just recent creation, and whom we will ask to\ngive us his opinion on the age of this beautiful plant.\n\n_The Botanist._--\"You wish to ascertain the age of this _Alsophila_. I\nknow of no data by which this can be determined with precision, but I\ncan indicate it approximately. Let us take it in order. The most recent\ndevelopment is the growing point in the centre of the arching crown of\nleaves. Around this you would see, if your eyes were above the plane,\nclose ring-like bodies, or, perhaps, more like snail-shells, protruding\nfrom the growing bud; then young leaves, partially opened in various\ndegrees, but coiled up scroll-wise at their tips, and around these the\nelegant fretted fronds, which expand broadly outwards in a radiating\nmanner, and arch downwards.\n\n\"Now every one of these broad fronds was at first a compactly coiled\nring; but it has, in the course of development, uncoiled itself, growing\nat the same time from its extremity, and from the extremity of each of\nits formerly wrapped-up pinn\u00e6 and pinnules, until at length it has\nattained the expanse you behold. This process has certainly occupied\nseveral days.\n\n\"But let us look farther. The outermost fronds that compose this\nexquisite cupola, you see, are nearly naked; indeed, the extreme\noutermost are quite naked, being stripped of their verdant honours,\ntheir pinn\u00e6 and pinnules, and left mere dry and sapless sticks,--the\nlong and taper midribs of what were once green fronds, as graceful as\nthose that now surmount them. Some of them, you see, are hanging\ndownward, almost detached from the stem, and ready to drop at the first\nbreath of wind. Now remember, each of these brown unsightly sticks was\nonce a frond, that had passed through all the steps of uncoiling from\nits circinate condition. This whole process has certainly occupied\nseveral months.\n\n\"Look, now, below these withered midribs, lifting up the most drooping\nof them. The stem is marked with great oval scars; and see, this old\nfrond-rib has come off in my hand, leaving just such a scar, and adding\none more to the number that were there before. And look down the stem;\nit is studded all over with these oval scars. There are a hundred and\nfifty at least; but I cannot count them nearly all, for towards the\nlower part they become more undefined, and the growth of the stem has\nthrown them further apart; and besides, there is, as you observe, a\nmatted mass of tangled rootlets, like tarred twine, which, springing\nfrom between the lower scars, increases downwards, till the whole\ninferior extremity of the stem is encased in the dank and reeking mass.\n\n\"You can have no doubt that every one of these scars indicates where a\nleaf has grown, where it has waved its time, and whence, after death and\ndecay, it at length sloughed away. The form of the uppermost, which are\nnot distorted by age, agrees exactly with the outline of the bulging\nbase of the candelabrum-like frond; the arrangement of the scars is that\nof the fronds; and you may notice in every scar marks where the\nhorseshoe-shaped plates of woody fibre have been broken off, which once\npassed into the interior of the stem from the midrib of the frond.\n\n\"These scars, then, are ocular demonstrations of former fronds; we may\nno more doubt that fronds were once growing from these spots, than we\nmay that the green and leafy arches were once coiled up in a circinate\nvernation. They are the record of the past history of this organism, and\nthey evidently reach far back into time. The periodic ratio of\ndevelopment of new fronds may be, perhaps, roughly estimated at six in\nthe course of a year. Now there are about a dozen unfolded or unfolding,\nas many withering midribs, and about a hundred and fifty leaf-scars\nthat we can count with ease, not reckoning such as are indistinct, nor\nsuch as are concealed beneath the tangled drapery of roots.\n\n[Illustration: LEAF-SCARS OF TREE-FERN.]\n\n\"I have no hesitation, then, in pronouncing this plant to be thirty\nyears old; it is probably much older, but it is, at least, as old as\nthis.\"\n\nSuch is the report of our botanical adviser; such is his argument; and\nwe cannot but admit that it is invulnerable; his conclusion is\ninevitable, but for one fact, which he is not aware of. There is one\nobjection, however, to which it is open--a fatal one; you and I know\nthat the Tree-fern is not five minutes old, _for it was created but this\nmoment_.\n\nHere is another act of creation. It may be the same day as that of the\nTree-fern, or one as remote as you please from it, before or after. A\nfew moments ago this was a great mass of rough, naked limestone, but by\ncreative energy it has been suddenly clothed with a luxuriant mantle of\n_Selaginella_. How exquisitely beautiful the aggregation of flattened\nbranching stems, studded with their tiny imbricated leaflets of tender\ngreen, bloomed with blue! and how thick and soft the carpet that thus\nconceals the angles and points and crevices of the unsightly stone!\nBroad as is this expanse of verdure, covering many square yards without\na flaw, and rooted as it is at ten thousand points of its creeping stem,\nwe shall yet find that it is one unbroken structure. Our friend the\nbotanist would infer unhesitatingly that every part of this widespread\nramification has originally proceeded from one central shoot, and that\nseveral years' growth must have concurred to form this compact mass.\n\nYet _we_ know that such an inference would be false. The plant has been\nthis instant called into being.\n\nOn the summit of this rounded hill is a very different plant from the\nlast. Beautiful it also is, but grandeur and majesty are its leading\nattributes. It is a dense and massive clump of the Tulda Bamboo. How\nnoble these straight-jointed stems, cylinders of polished green,\nshooting their points right upwards, and towering to a height of eighty\nfeet! The numerous panicles of tufty blossom are gracefully bending from\nthe summits, and from the tip of every branch, nodding in the breeze.\nThere are scores of the tall stems, as straight as an arrow, beset at\nevery joint with diverging horizontal branches, crossing and recrossing\nin inextricable confusion. And see, amidst the crowd, there are others\nas thick and tall, but without a single side-shoot, clothed, however, to\natone for the deficiency, in swaddling-clothes peculiarly their own.\n\nThese swathed stems are infant shoots,--vigorous and promising children,\nindeed; these brown triangular sheaths, covered with down, are the\nclothing of infancy; they increase in number, and are closer together\ntowards the summit of the shoot, where the growing point is rapidly\nextending. When the stems have attained their full height, these\nsheaths will fall off, the polished shafts will stand revealed in their\nglossy beauty, and the lateral pointed branches will at once start forth\nfrom every joint, and pierce horizontally through the dense tangled\nbush.\n\nNow these young shoots do not bear testimony to so great an age as you\nwould suppose. The whole seventy feet of their altitude have been\nattained within thirty days! But then their massive size and vigour\nindicate a mature age in the clump. For all the hundred stems that are\ncrowded together in this dense Bamboo-clump are organically united; they\nare parts of one and the same plant, the root-stock of which has been\ncreeping to and fro year after year, sending up in constant succession\nits arrowy stems, until it has attained the present magnificence. Many\nyears must have elapsed between the present condition of the grove, and\nthat of the slender blade that shot up from the tiny seed in this spot.\n\nYes, so you may think. But it is not so, for the great Bamboo-clump has\nbeen created in its pride and glory this very hour!\n\nYonder is a considerable area of land covered with the green blades of\nyoung wheat, and very healthy and strong it looks. No, it is\nCouch-grass! The whole green sward which we see is a single plant; the\ncreeping stem of which has spread its ramifications in all directions\nbeneath the surface of the soil; and still the long succulent shoots are\nextending in every direction, as shewn by the green leaf-blades. This is\na rapidly growing plant, it is true; yet still there must be an\naccumulated growth of many months here, if not years! No, it was created\nthis morning.\n\nContrasting with this humble grass, observe that luxuriant Screw-pine.\nSee its singular crown of foliage at the summit of its equally singular\nstem. Its great prickle-edged stiff leaves grow in long diagonal rows,\neach sheathing its successor, and alternating with those of the next\nrow. How rich and fragrant an odour is diffused from its crowded\nblossoms!\n\nEvery one of those sword-like leaves is, of course, the record of a\nperiod of time. A tree of this size makes a \"screw,\" or imperfect spire,\nof leaves in about three years; and there are about sixteen pairs of\nleaves in each screw, which will give us nearly eleven leaves for the\ndevelopment of each season. Now, on the trunk, there are numerous waved\nlines quite covering its surface, which are the traces of old leaves\nthat have in succession been produced and decayed away;--the trunk is,\nin fact, composed of these leaf-bases. By counting these, we may obtain\nthen an approximate notion of the age of this plant;--an _approximate_\nnotion only, because in its young stages the development of leaves\nprobably took place more rapidly than it does now. There are then on\nthis trunk about one hundred and fifty horizontal rows of scars, and\neach row numbers four leaf-bases, so that the trunk is inscribed with an\nautographic record of six hundred leaves. If then we reckon eleven\nleaves as the produce of a single season, and add the four screws which\nare still flourishing, we shall obtain a result of about fifty-five\nyears as the age of this _Pandanus_. This, for the reason just assigned,\nwould probably be considerably too much; perhaps, forty years would be\nnearer the truth.\n\nThere are, however, other marks of age here, though they are less\ndefinite. The great hardness of the surface-wood, which we perceive on\ntrying to indent it, is an indication of age, as it is produced by the\nsuccessive bundles of woody fibre, which, year after year, have passed\ndown from each leaf, curving, in their descent, towards the\ncircumference of the stem, and, therefore, constantly augmenting the\ndensity of the outer portions.\n\nAnother very curious proof of age is seen in the number of aerial roots\nwhich descend from various points of the trunk towards the soil. You\nwould at first be inclined to think them posts, which a carpenter had\nset to \"shore up\" the tree, as props to prevent its being blown down.\nAnd truly this is their purpose; but they are natural adjuncts, not\nartificial. These thick rods, some of which have not yet reached the\nground, have been shot forth in turn from the stem, in order to afford\nit additional support in the loose sandy soil. And mark, by the way, a\nbeautiful contrivance here. Because the growing tender extremity of the\nroot has to pass through the sun-parched air in its progress towards the\nearth, there is a curious exfoliation of its extremity, forming a sort\nof cup, which, collecting the scanty dews, retains sufficient moisture\nfor the refreshment of the spongy rootlet. Now, I say, these supporting\nroots, since they must have originated from the trunk, after the latter\nhad attained a considerable height, are so many evidences--and\ncumulative evidences--of age, though their testimony cannot be so well\nmade to bear on a known period as that of the leaf-bases.\n\nShould we not then be amply warranted in asserting this Screw-pine to be\nmany years old, if we were not assured that, as a fact, it has been\nthis instant created?\n\n[Illustration: ROOTS OF IRIARTEA.]\n\nA phenomenon analogous to that which we have just observed is presented\nby yonder Pashiuba Palm (_Iriartea exorhiza_). Its straight arrowy stem\nhas shot up to the height of fifty feet, like a slender iron column. On\nthe summit there is the usual divergent crown of leaves that\ndistinguishes this most graceful and queenly tribe; and at the foot, a\ntall open cone of roots, strangely supporting the column on its apex.\n\n\"But what most strikes attention in this tree, and renders it so\npeculiar, is, that the roots are almost entirely above ground. They\nspring out from the stem, _each one at a higher point than the last_,\nand extend diagonally downwards till they approach the ground, when they\noften divide into many rootlets, each of which secures itself in the\nsoil. As fresh ones spring out from the stem, _those below become rotten\nand die off_; and it is not an uncommon thing to see a lofty tree\nsupported entirely by three or four roots, so that a person may walk\nerect beneath them, or stand with a tree seventy feet high growing\nimmediately over his head.\"\n\n\"In the forests where these trees grow, numbers of young plants of every\nage may be seen, all miniature copies of their parents, except that they\nseldom possess more than three legs, which gives them a strange and\nalmost ludicrous appearance.\"[53]\n\nThis tall Pashiuba before us, however, is supported on several scores\nof roots, in various stages of development, some descending through the\nair, some already fixed in the soil. As the presence of these, moreover,\nimplies the decay and disappearance of earlier ones, their number and\nheight may be accepted as a fair testimony to the age of the tree;\nindependent of what we might have deduced from the trunk and other\nsources. (My reader will bear in mind, that, throughout this chapter, I\nam supposing that we have the opportunity of seeing each organism at the\nmoment following that of its creation.) The _Iriartea_ before us, then,\nnotwithstanding its marks of maturity, is but--a new-born infant, I was\nabout to say, rather--a new-made adult.\n\nAnother and more massive Palm appears, where a moment ago there was\nnothing but smooth ground and empty air. It is the Sugar Palm (_Saguerus\nsaccharifer_), remarkable in its appearance for the swathes of what\nlooks to be _sackcloth of hair_, in which its stem is enveloped. Each of\nits great pinnate leaves forms with the dilated base of its midrib a\nbroad sheath, which springs out of a loose fold of this coarse cloth\nthat is wrapped around it. And not only the bases of the still\nflourishing leaves are swathed in this natural textile fabric, but the\ndead and dry leaf-bases of the former leaves, which may be traced all\ndown the stem. But let us look at this strange cloth: what is it? It is\ncomposed of the exterior fibres of the leaf-bases themselves, which in\nprocess of growth have partially separated themselves, and from which\nthe parenchyma and the lamina have decayed away. The appearance of a\nwoven fabric is deceptive; there is no interlacing; but its semblance is\nproduced by the fibres lying in layers one over the other, and by some\nof them having a direction at right angles to the others. Originally all\nthe fibres were parallel and longitudinal, but as they have been, in the\ngrowth of the leaf, pulled out laterally, the main fibres, which are\nindefinitely divisible, have adhered to each other at various parts, and\nthe result has been that innumerable constituent fibrill\u00e6 have been\nstretched across from fibre to fibre.\n\nEvery square inch, then, of this sackcloth tells of the lapse of time;\nthese horse-hair-like fibres were once green and vascular, enclosing a\nsoft pulp; in short, they were a part of a verdant leaf; the reduction\nof each congeries of veins to this condition was a work of time, and\nthis has been effected by many leaf-bases in succession.\n\nAn examination of this _gomuti_, as it is called, does not indeed help\nus to identify the actual interval lapsed in the history of the plant;\nbut we may arrive at this from other considerations. The great sheathing\nbases themselves remain in numbers attached to the upper portion of the\nstem, though the greater portion of the midrib with the pinn\u00e6 has\ndecayed and fallen; and in the lower part, where even the bases have\ndisappeared, still broad lateral scars are left, marking off the stipe\ninto horizontal rings, which are not less conclusively certain evidences\nof the former existence of similar bases, and therefore, still earlier,\nof leaves.\n\nThe Sugar Palm developes and matures on an average six leaves every\nyear.[54] On counting the dry leaf-bases, and the scars, I find on this\ntrunk, a hundred and twenty: besides which there are about a dozen\nexpanded leaves, and two visible, which are not unfolded. A hundred and\nthirty-four leaves then have left proofs of their existence here; which\ndivided by six, gives about twenty-two years as the age of this Palm.\nThis is the age of this tree, however, since it began to form a stem;\nbut several years of infancy must be added to the sum, during which its\nfronds sprang in succession from the surface of the soil.\n\nLook at this _Areca_. By-and-by it will grow to the loftiest stature\nattained by any of its tribe, and its noble crown of leaves will wave on\nthe summit of a slender pillar a hundred and fifty feet in height. But\nat present it has no stem at all; the widely arching leaves diverge from\na central point which is below the surface of the soil. Here, then, are\nno dead leaf-bases; here are no old historical scars:--have we any\nevidence of past time here? Yes, surely. See this fully developed leaf.\nIt is composed of a stout midrib, along the two opposite edges of which\ngrow, like the beards of a feather, narrow sword-like leaflets,\nseparated from each other by intervals of about two inches. But this\npinnate condition,--which is so inseparable from the developed leaf of a\ngreat division of the Palm tribe, that our idea of a palm-leaf almost\nalways is that of an enormous feather,--is by no means the original\nstate. Observe this young leaf which is not yet thoroughly expanded; the\nleaflets are, indeed, separated everywhere, except that the tips of all\nare connected by a very narrow ribbon of the common green lamina, which\nruns from one to another. In the fully opened leaves, this has been torn\napart and is not distinguishable.\n\nBut, let us carefully open this still younger leaf, which is protruding\nlike a thin green rod, or rather like a closed fan, from the centre of\nthe crown. We must handle it delicately, for it is very tender. Now you\nsee it is not pinnate at all; the leaf is as entire as a _Musa_ leaf,\nwhich, indeed, it much resembles, except that each half is folded\ntransversely, and then these transverse folds are packed one on another\nlongitudinally, fan-fashion. Each of the transverse folds answers to a\nfuture leaflet. It is the development of the midrib in length that tears\nasunder the divisions of the lamina, and converts them into separate,\nand by-and-by remote, pinn\u00e6.\n\nIt is manifest then that every leaflet on the midrib of a pinnate-leaved\nPalm is a record of past time, as real as the leaf-bases on the trunk,\ninasmuch as, in each case, there is ocular proof that the conditions of\nexistence are different from what they have been. And yet in this case,\nthe evidences are fallacious, since the _Areca_ before us has even now\nbeen created.\n\nHere is an extraordinary plant. Though no thicker than your little\nfinger, it will be found almost a quarter of a mile in length.[55] This\nis a kind of Cane (_Calamus_); its slender jointed and polished stem is\nencased in the closely-sheathing and tubular bases of the leaves, which\nare spiny on their midribs, spiny on their pinn\u00e6, and horridly spiny on\nthe long and tough whip-lash in which the point of each leaf terminates.\nThis lengthened cord is studded, at intervals of a few inches, with\nwhorls of stout and acute prickles which are hooked backwards, and\nperforms an important part in the economy of the plant. We see how it\nsprawls along the ground a few yards, then climbs up a tall tree, runs\nover the summit, descends on the opposite side to the ground, mounts\nover another tree, and thus pursues its wormlike course. Now as the\npinnate leaves are put forth at every joint, the formidably armed\nflagellum affords a secure holdfast to the climbing stem, which\notherwise would be liable to be blown prostrate by the first gust of\nwind; the recurved hooks, however, catch in the leaves and twigs of the\ntrees, and effectually maintain the domination of the prickly intruder.\n\nIt is obvious that every inch sprawled over by this trailing stem\nsupposes all the previous inches of its lengthening course; that every\nsuccessive joint implies the existence of all the earlier joints; that\nevery whorl of spines involves the development of every former whorl.\nYet our reasoning is at fault; there has been as yet no succession; the\ndevelopment has been simultaneous, for it is the development, not of\ngrowth, but of creation.\n\nEnough of Palms. Look at this _Agave_. Its thick, fleshy, glaucous\nleaves, with spinous margins and pointed ends, are arranged in many\nwhorls on the summit of a stem, which is scarcely visible, as it barely\nrises above the soil. From the centre of the crown springs the stately\nflower-stalk, itself a tree of forty feet in stature, having a cluster\nof yellow blossoms at the extremities of its candelabra-like branches.\n\nHave we here any clue to the past history of the plant? The tall\nflower-stalk, it is true, is of rapid growth, its whole stature having\nbeen attained within three or four weeks. But those massive leaves! Each\nof these lasts many years, and their development is as slow as that of\nthe flower-stalk is rapid. Certainly we cannot assign to this\nindividual, in the very vigour of its inflorescence, an antiquity less\nthan half a century, and perhaps it may be considerably more.\n\nYou are altogether wrong; for it is but just called into existence.\n\n[Illustration: TRAVELLER'S TREE.]\n\nWe pass on, and pause before a noble example of one of the stateliest of\nplants,--the Traveller's Tree (_Urania speciosa_). It is a great\nMusaceous plant, resembling one of those fans which in the Southern\nStates of America are made by ladies out of the broad tail-feathers of a\nturkey. Its leaves, of vast size, consist of a broad oblong lamina of\nthe most brilliant green hue, divided equally by a midrib which descends\nin a smooth cylindrical petiole, much longer than the lamina (which is\nitself eight feet or more in length). Each leaf-stalk terminates below\nin a great demi-sheath, out of which springs another, in a zigzag or\ndistichous fashion, the whole diverging, as they rise, in the same\nplane.\n\nBelow the alternately-sheathing leaves, of which there are but eight at\npresent existing, there are the bases of others, now dead, which, when\nalive, evidently followed the same arrangement; and these give place yet\nlower to rings, each partly surrounding a massive conical stem.\n\nI fear we have no criterion for determining the exact age of such a\nplant as this from actual observations on its rate of growth. From the\nfewness of its existing leaves they probably endure a considerable time;\nbut at all events here are indubitable evidences of successive\ngenerations of leaves which are now past and gone; some of which are\nrepresented by withered rib-bases, while older ones have left but the\nscars which indicate the positions on the trunk where once they stood.\nHere are distinct testimonies to the lapse of a considerable period of\ntime since the magnificent _Urania_, began its existence. Yet we should\nerr egregiously by giving credence to them, since these developments are\nall _prochronic_.\n\n\"What a lovely butterfly!\" Nay, it is a flower: though it dances in the\nair with an insect's fluttering flight, and seems to present in its\nbroad wings of yellow and orange, and in its long and slender members,\nan insect's form and hues, it is but a flower fixed at the end of a\nlengthened stalk, which hangs from, a mass of leaves and bulbs, seated\nin the fork of this huge mahogany-tree.\n\nWe will neglect the flower, curious and beautiful as it is, and examine\nthis crowded mass of roots and fleshy leaves and oval bulbs.\n\nTracing the slender lengthened footstalk to its origin, we see that it\nsprings from the lower part of a flat, ovate, or nearly round, ridged,\npseudo-bulb, of a purplish-green hue, of which there are many, much\ncrowded together. The point of issue of the flower-stalk is concealed by\nan enveloping husky scale, which is the withered condition of a former\nleaf. From the base of another bulb a thick obtuse cone is pushing\nforth, which is the commencement of a new leaf-shoot; and here is one\nconsiderably advanced. In this latter there is nothing very remarkable;\nit is a thick, growing shoot, formed by fleshy leaves nearly doubled\ntogether, each sheathed by its predecessor. But soon this will cease to\ngrow, and the point will dilate into an oval bulb, which will be a\nreservoir of nutriment for the future flower. In fact it will add\nanother to the matted mass of bulbs which are already accumulated,\ncrowned with two great thick, leathery, ovate, brown-spotted leaves, and\nmarked with the scars of the leaves which are now growing, but which\nwill then have sloughed away.\n\nIn this _Oncidium_, then, we have evidently a record of many bygone\nprocesses. Before the flower could open, the flower-stalk must have been\ndeveloped; before this, the pseudo-bulb must have been formed; before\nthis, there must have been a well-formed leaf-shoot, which must have\nbeen first a conical bud pushing forth from some anterior bulb;--or, if\nthat shoot had been the first of the mass, then it must have looked back\nto a seed, which of course looked back to the capsule of a pre-existent\nflower, and so on.\n\nYet this is all fallacious; for the Butterfly-flower is but just\ncreated.\n\nAs beautiful, if less curious, is the crowded spike of purple blossom\nthat adorns the tall stalk of this terrestrial Orchis. The flower-stalk\nsprings from the midst of a few large spotted leaves, which terminate\nbelow in an irregular fleshy tuber of glutinous consistence. This tuber\nis shrivelled, and is in process of exhaustion and decay; but a\nhorizontal stem has pushed out underground, which has at its extremity a\nsecond tuber, as yet immature, but plump and swelling. This growing\ntuber contains the elements of the leaves and flower-spike of next\nseason: the shrivelling one was, last year at this period, in exactly\nthe same condition as the swelling one is now; it too was pushed out\nhorizontally from a preceding one which was then shrivelling, and so\nbackward. These pre-existing stages can with certainty be announced by\nthe vegetable physiologist; who yet would be deceived in this instance,\nbecause the plant has been but just created.\n\nThis elegant _Gladiolus_ that displays its tall spike of crimson\nblossoms from the midst of its flattened folded leaves, affords us a\nsimilar example of retrospective energy. If I dig away the light soil\nfrom around its base, I discover two globose corms, fleshy swellings of\nthe stem, accumulations of nutriment obtained during the vegetative\nactivity of the plant, and destined to support it during the season of\ninaction, and therefore stored up for that purpose.\n\n[Illustration: CORM OF GLADIOLUS IN JUNE.]\n\nThe uppermost of these globose corms is that of the present season; it\nis as yet small and immature, being in process of formation by the\nassimilation, consolidation, and deposition of new matter by the action\nof the leaves. This is sheathed in the tubular bases of the leaves,\nwhich expand above; and it is seated on a larger, riper, and more\nspherical corm, which is wrapped in a brown fibrous skin. This is the\nmatter which was deposited in the course of last spring and summer, and\nthe brown skin is the remains of the leaves of last year. This corm has\nremained inactive, since the decay of last year's leaves, until this\nwinter, when the root fibres, which we see descending from the lower\nsurface, began to form, and an upward prolongation of the stem followed,\nwhich, as it grew, swelled into the upper corm.\n\nIn the centre of the under surface of the corm of last season, in a\ndepression surrounded by the white root-fibres, there are some almost\ndecayed remains of a deep brown hue. These are the last vestiges of the\npreceding year's corm, and they exhibit the condition in which the large\ncorm will be next spring, when the small half-formed one will be in the\nstate and position of this larger one, and will in like manner be\nsurmounted by its rising successor.\n\nThus there are in this plant ocular proofs of two years' history before\nthe present; yet these proofs are invalidated by the fact of its\ncreation this day.\n\nBehold now that singular plant, the Grass-tree (_Kingia australis_),\ndisplaying what seems an immense tuft of wiry grass elevated on the\nsummit of a trunk which is formed of the united bases of myriads of\ndecayed leaves, the representatives of many generations of these\norgans. The silvery leaves which constitute the existing crown, and the\nnumerous spikes of blossom which stand up in a circle diverging from the\nmidst of them, give to this plant a most striking effect. That, however,\nis not our present concern, but the evidences which we may be able to\ngather from it of a previous history. For some distance below the living\nleaves, the trunk is connected by the withered, hanging, but still\npersistent leaves of several successive developments, a ragged drapery,\nof which we might certainly say--\n\n     \"----when unadorn'd, adorn'd the most.\"\n\nThe lower portion of the stem is, however, destitute of the decayed\nleaves themselves, the lozenge-formed bases of them alone remaining,\nstill separable, indeed, but sufficiently compact to make in the\naggregate a sub-cylindrical column of loose texture, which may in\nfamiliar parlance be termed a _trunk_. This portion is marked by\nalternate enlargements and constrictions of the outline, which appear to\nindicate seasonal growths.\n\nThe specimen before us is about twenty feet in height, exclusive of the\ncrown; supposing these swellings to mark a year's growth, and to be\ncontinued in the same proportion on that part of the trunk which is\nmasked by the decayed leaves as on the exposed part, we should conclude\nthis tree to be about thirty-five years old; for there are about\nthirty-four such swellings, each of which contains about four hundred of\nthe lozenge-shaped bases of the fallen leaves.[56]\n\nRemember, however, that we are looking at the Grass-tree, not as it now\nappears on the sandy plains of Western Australia, in the nineteenth\ncentury, but as it came out of the hands of its Almighty Creator at some\nprecise but unknown period of past time.\n\nThis White Lily, crowned with its cluster of nodding flowers,\nmagnificently beautiful, each a fair emblem of the spotless purity of a\nnoble virgin--if we remove the soil from its base, we shall find that\nthe stem springs out of a fleshy bulb. This is covered with thick yellow\nscales, by taking away each of which in turn, we see that the bulb is\nmade up of such, surrounding the central mass which has pushed upward,\nin the form of the stalk, with its leaves and flowers.\n\n[Illustration: SECTION OF LILY-BULB IN JULY.]\n\nNow the whole of this beautiful array which we see was formed last\nsummer, when, if we had divided the bulb longitudinally, we should have\nseen every leaf, every tiny blossom, folded together, and most snugly\npacked within the encircling scales, which are, indeed, undeveloped\nleaves; while from the base of the bulb so formed we should have seen\npushed up on the outside of it, but yet within the common envelope of\nthe exterior scales, the flower-stem of last season. There could not\npossibly have been this raceme of virgin blossom, if it had not been\nformed during the preceding season within the bulb; so that its\nexistence is a record of a year's growth at least.\n\nYet this is the first hour of the lovely Lily's life; an hour ago it was\nnot.\n\nThe face of the rugged cliff that rises perpendicularly above us was, a\nfew moments ago, quite naked and bare, or diversified only by a few\nstunted prickly shrubs that sprang from its crevices. Now, by the mighty\nfiat of God, it is in an instant festooned from top to bottom with a\nmost graceful drapery of round pale-green leaves, and slender stems no\nthicker than whipcord, and multitudes of spiral tendrils that climb, and\nhook, and catch, and entwine among the thorny bushes, and around the\nangles and prominences of the rock. We trace this curtain of verdure\ndownwards, and find that it resolves itself into some half a dozen of\nwiry-stems, that issue from different points of the surface of what\nseems a boulder of brown stone, or a block of rough-hewn timber, at the\nfoot of the cliff.\n\n[Illustration: TESTUDINARIA.]\n\nThis angular block is, however, worthy of closer examination. It is of\nno definite form, huge and uncouth, lying as if cast accidentally on the\nground. Its whole surface is divided into a multitude of polyhedral\npieces, that look as if they had been cut into these forms by human\nart. Each division has a small angular face, and its sides display close\nparallel lines, all following the directions and angles of the outer\nface, but each line enclosing a slightly wider area than the one above\nit. These woody plates closely resemble in their angular forms and their\nconcentric lines the plates of a Tortoise's shell, and hence our\nbotanical friend, to whom we will appeal for an opinion as to the age of\nthe block, will call the generic name _Testudinaria_.\n\n\"Well, I cannot give you any very precise judgment on the matter. The\nblock itself is the tuber of a sort of yam, which grows above ground\ninstead of below. It is a woody mass of great age. The angular plates\nare the bark, and they are so divided in consequence of the gradual\ngrowth of the tuber, tearing open its periphery to obtain more room. The\nconcentric lines on the edges of the plates will not give us any\nadequate idea of the age of the mass, for though they indicate seasonal\ngrowths, the earlier layers have been worn away in the lapse of ages,\nand there are many layers of bark that have not yet been burst by the\nexpansive force of the growing wood. It is known that these blocks are\nof very slow growth; in tropical regions they last, with scarcely\nperceptible increase, from generation to generation. From such vague\ndata as we possess, I might loosely conjecture this tuber to be a\nthousand years old.\"\n\nWe thank our scientific friend, and think it a very satisfactory report\non an organism, which we saw called into existence five minutes ago,\nbefore our eyes.\n\nCome away; for I wish you to look at this _Encephalalartos_. A horrid\nplant it is, a sort of caricature of the elegant Palms, somewhat as if a\nfounder had essayed a cocoa-nut tree in cast iron. Out of the thick,\nrough, stiff stem spring a dozen of arching fronds, beset with sharp,\nsword-shaped leaflets, but having the rigidity of horn, of a greyish\nhue, all harsh and repulsive to excess. In the midst of this rigid\ncoronal sits the fruit, like an immense pine-cone.\n\nThe swelling column that constitutes the stem is but a mass of pith,\nsurrounded by a thin case of wood, and enclosed by the remains of former\nleaves. The whole surface is covered with the lozenge-shaped scars of\nthese, in vast number. Thousands of these there must be in this trunk of\neight feet high, and a foot thick. The leaves of the existing crown are\nfew and very durable, so that it would be no unreasonable conjecture to\nsuppose that this great Cycadaceous plant is seven or eight centuries\nold.\n\n[Illustration: ENCEPHALARTOS.]\n\nNay, for this also has been created even now!\n\nWhat shall we say to _this_ singular phenomenon? Observe yonder gigantic\nFig (_Ficus Australis_) growing out of the face of that vast rocky\nprecipice. It is not so much to the massive grandeur of the trunk, nor\nto the widespread head of dense foliage, that I call your attention, as\nto the broad expanse of roots, from the thickness of your body to that\nof your little finger, which have crossed and interlaced and separated\nand re-united, in all imaginable ways, until the whole forms a great\nflat network of wood, investing the surface of the rock, and following\nall its projections and angles with singular faithfulness, for a space\nof many square yards.\n\nWould you not say, admitting that the Figs are rapid growers, that many\nyears must have elapsed since the minute seed was dropped in yonder\ncrevice, by some vagrant parrot that wiped his beak after breakfast on\nthe point of rock? Would you not say that many years must have passed\nfrom the time when the tiny shoot peeped from the rocky chink, to the\npresent moment, when the leafy honours of the crown above and the woody\nwall of the roots below combine to repay the protection which the plant\nin infancy received from its stony foster mother?\n\nOf course you would; and most truly too, did you not know that the\nFig-tree is now rejoicing in the first hour of its new-created being.\n\nSo with its noble congener here, the many-trunked Banyan (_Ficus\nIndica_). Although not an old tree, its canopy of broad downy leaves is\nalready supported by so many secondary trunks, that it is not easy to\nsay which of the larger stems is the mother trunk, and which the hopeful\ndaughters. Every one of these stems, some just protruding from the\nhorizontal limbs, others hanging midway between the leafy roof and the\nearth, some just inserting their slender spongy tips into the soil,\nothers thick and pillar-like--is an evidence of progressive development,\nand therefore of lapsed time; only for the qualifying fact, that the\ndevelopment in this case is _prochronic_.\n\nHere is the great _Euphorbia grandidens_ of Africa. Its stout trunk is\nmarked with a number of holes, some four or five inches apart, arranged\nin perpendicular rows. In some cases they are rather depressions or\npittings than holes, and look like what would result from borings made\nwith an auger in pitch in warm weather, the margins of which had nearly\nclosed, subsequently. What is the explanation of these marks? They are\nall records of time. From each of these spots once grew one of those\nangular prickly branches, that look like our commonest sorts of\n_Cactus_, and which are now confined to the summit of the trunk,\narching out from it, somewhat like the branches of a candlestick.\n\nIt is the habit of this plant, when the stem has acquired a certain\nthickness, that the branches should, after a time, decay and drop off at\nthe point of their union with the trunk, or rather a little below the\nsurface, so as to leave the shallow holes or pits which we see. After\ntheir decadence, the growing bark gradually swells around the scars, and\nhas a tendency to obliterate them. This may account for the\nnon-appearance of them on the lower parts of the stem.\n\nHere, then, are demonstrations of several successive stages of\ndevelopment. First, the stem must have been in existence before any\nlateral branches could have sprung from it. Secondly, the branch shot\nout. Thirdly, it put forth its spines and leaves. Fourthly, it died and\nsloughed away. Fifthly, the growing bark encroached on, and finally\nobliterated the cicatrice.\n\nIn this individual, all these stages are illusory, or rather they are\nprochronic.\n\nSee this noble Tulip-tree (_Liriodendron tulipiferum_), a giant of this\nprimeval forest; its towering trunk is crowned with a head of large\nmassy foliage, of a rich deep verdure, among which shine numbers of\ngreat golden tulip-like blossoms, as fragrant as beautiful.\n\nIt is, however, the leaves that grow on the terminal twigs that I wish\nyou specially to notice. These, which, as you see, are large, and of a\nremarkably elegant form, are fixed at the end of long petioles, which\nare set alternately on the twig. Notice, now, the manner of their\ndevelopment; the young unexpanded leaves grow within two large leaf-like\nbracts, forming an oval sac, which, as the young leaf increases, swell,\nand at length burst, and are left on each side of the base of the\nleaf-stalk. There is a succession of these. On this growing twig, for\ninstance, I find three leaves already expanded (_a a a_ in the\naccompanying figure), and as many pairs of these bracts (_b b b_) at\ntheir bases; the twig is terminated by a pair (_c_) convex outwardly,\nand whose edges are in contact with each other; if, now, I cut off one\nof these (as represented at _d_), I expose the next leaf (_e_) folded\ntogether, and bent downward, in its pretty manner of _vernation_; beside\nit is another pair of bracts (_f_), whose edges are not only in contact,\nbut mutually adherent, and that with considerable force. On tearing\nthese apart, I discover another smaller leaf, and another smaller pair\nof adhering bracts, which again contain a similar set, only yet more\nminute, and so on in succession, till I can no longer trace them.\n\n[Illustration: TWIG OF TULIP-TREE.]\n\nNow it is manifest that the uppermost of the three leaves, together with\nthe developing terminal bud, was at one time enclosed in the pair of\nbracts immediately below its base; that, before that, the middle leaf,\nwith all above it, was similarly incarcerated in its own proper tracts;\nand, at a period anterior to that, the lowest leaf also. Each pair of\nbracts is therefore a record of a past period; and together they testify\nto a succession of past periods.\n\nAnd yet their combined testimony is utterly worthless, because the noble\ntree was created in its magnificence this very day.\n\nThe beautiful twiner (_Bignonia_), which has cast its ample festoons\nover the topmost branches of yonder towering Mora-tree, almost\nconcealing the natural foliage with its own elegantly pinnate leaves,\nand adorning it with its gorgeous trumpet-shaped flowers, is\ndistinguished by a curious property, indicative of the years that have\npassed over it. In its adult maturity, as we now see it--the glory of\nthis tropical forest--we should find, if we cut across the main stem,\nthat its wood is divided into lobes arranged in a radiate or star-like\nfashion, like the divisions seen on dividing an orange transversely; and\nthese lobes are thirty-two in number.\n\nBut this condition has not existed through the life of the plant. The\nwood has always been lobed, but the number of the divisions has varied,\nand that in geometrical ratio. Before the present stage, the constituent\nlobes were sixteen, which became thirty-two by the subdivision of each.\nIn an earlier stage there were eight lobes, and, earlier still, four,\nwhich was the commencing number; the duplication having proceeded in\neach case by the fission of each of the existing lobes into two.[57]\n\nNow though this phenomenon will afford us, on the data we at present\npossess, no insight into the age of the plant, considered as an actual\nchronological period, an examination of a transverse section would\nalways determine which stage is then present, and, by consequence, how\nmany previous stages have been passed through. And thus we obtain a\ndistinct clue to the former history of the organism, though we cannot\nmark it off into months and years.\n\nYet the fact of creation stultifies all the conclusions that we might\nform from such premises; since it does, _ipso facto_, contradict every\nsuch thing as a previous history.\n\nOn this _Anona_ there is an intruder more strictly parasitical; it is a\n_Loranthus_, with long, club-shaped, richly-coloured blossoms. The\nbranches of the supporting tree--a nurse who feeds her foster-child on\nher own vital juices--are over-spread for a large space with the shoots;\nwhich, springing each from its own disk, appear like so many distinct\nindividuals, but are really all parts of a single plant, springing from\na single seed. (For this curious fact we are indebted to the\nobservations of Mr. Griffith, who has investigated the singular history\nof these parasites.)\n\nThe ripe seeds firmly adhere to the substance on which they are applied,\nby means of their viscid envelope, which soon hardens into a transparent\nglue. In the course of two or three days, the radicle curves towards its\nsupport, and, as soon as it reaches it, becomes dilated and flattened.\nAn union is gradually formed between the woody system of the parasite\nand that of the stock, after which the former lives exclusively on the\nlatter, the fibres of the sucker-like root of the parasite expanding on\nthe wood of the support in the form of a _pat\u00e9 d'oie_. Up to that time\nthe parasite had been nourished by its own albumen, which is now\nexhausted. As soon as the young parasite has acquired the height of one\nor two inches, when an additional supply of nourishment is required, a\nlateral shoot is sent out, which is, especially towards the point, of a\ngreen colour. This at one, or two, and subsequently at various points,\nadheres to the support by means of sucker-like productions, which are\nprecisely similar in structure and mode of attachment to the original\nseminal one. The fibres of the parasite never penetrate beyond their\noriginal attachment; in the adult the sucker-bearing shoots frequently\nrun to a considerable distance, many plants being literally covered with\nparasites, all of which have originated from one and the same seed.[58]\n\n[Illustration: YOUNG PLANT OF LORANTHUS.]\n\nIn this case, again, how delusive would be any inference of actual\nlapse of time deduced from the condition of a plant, which had been\ncreated as an adult capable of reproducing its race!\n\nHere is a great impenetrable thicket of Prickly Pear. The delicate\nsulphur-hued flowers expand their broad bosoms to the sun, and the\nswelling fruit beneath is already putting on its lovely blush of\ncrimson. How curious are the leafless but leaf-like dilatations of the\nstem--these flat oval plates of parenchyma, studded with clusters of\nwoody and most acute spines!--Every one of these expansions is an\nexpression of time, as they are of course successive, though several may\nbe formed in a single season; and not only so, but the tufts of spines,\nwhich grow at the points of intersection of crossing lines, in a network\npattern, are all successive, appearing in turn as the expanded joint of\nthe stem grows out.\n\nThe jointed dilatations themselves are, however, transitory; in the slow\nlapse of years the common woody axis enlarges, and the interspaces\nbetween the oval plates become gradually filled up with cellular tissue,\nand thus are obliterated; the stem, as may be seen in the central part\nof this spreading thicket, becoming round, almost smooth, and of dense\nwoody texture. \"This condition is the result of many years,\" you say.\nIt is so, in the ordinary course of nature; but in the case before us,\nit has been educed in a totally different manner, and by a totally\ndifferent energy, viz. prochronically, by the omnipotent fiat of the\nCreator.\n\nWe have emerged from the forest glooms, and are come within the light\nand the music of the sparkling sea. And here at its margin, washed by\nits wavelets, there has been suddenly created a Mangrove tree\n(_Rhizophora_), destined to be, doubtless, the fruitful parent of a\ngrove, which by and by will fringe this flat and muddy shore for miles,\nshutting out the light and air which now freely play over the beach, and\nkeeping in, beneath a long canopy of dense and leathery foliage, the\nmurky vapours which will rise from the decomposition of its successive\nexuviations.\n\nAs yet it is a single tree, but in its perfection of maturity. And see\nhow characteristically we find here that singular structure, or rather\nhabit, which in Mangroves of normal development would be the effect of\nage. The trunk springs from the union of a number of slender arches,\neach forming the quadrant of a circle, whose extremities penetrate into\nthe muddy soil. These are the roots of the tree--there are no\nothers--that shoot out in this arched form from the base, or \"crown\" of\nthe stem, taking a very regular curve of six feet or more in length\nbefore they dip into the mud. The larger arches send out secondary\nshoots from their sides, which take the same curved form, but in a\ndirection at right angles to the former; and thus a complex array of\nvaulted lines is formed, which, to the crabs that run beneath--if they\nwere only able to institute the comparison, must be like the roof-groins\nof some Gothic church, supposing the interspaces to be open to the sky.\n\nNow, normally, it would require a lapse of several years from the first\ndip of the radicle of the seed into the soft soil, to form these arches,\nand to lift the axis of the tree a foot or eighteen inches above the\nsurface. But here the same result is achieved in a moment, by the\nexercise of creative power.\n\nLook at this _Eriodendron_. What a magnificent accumulation of vegetable\ncells is here! Its colossal trunk rises in naked majesty, a massive\ncolumn, to the height of a hundred feet, without a branch. And then what\nbranches! Those limbs themselves are of the bulk of ordinary forest\ntrees; they break out, three or four on the same plane, and radiate\nhorizontally to a vast distance, supporting a noble flat \"roof of\ninwoven shade.\"\n\n[Illustration: SILK-COTTON TREE.]\n\nPerhaps the most remarkable feature of this majestic tree is found at\nthe foot of the trunk, which sends out vast spurs, radiating in all\ndirections, and extending to a circle of seventy or eighty feet in\ndiameter. These spurs take the form of perpendicular walls of timber,\ncommonly not more than six or eight inches thick, pretty equal in their\nthickness throughout, and varying in height from fifteen or twenty feet,\nwhere they spring from the trunk, to the point where they enter the\nsoil.\n\nNow the Silk-cotton tree has not had this form through its life. When\nyoung, say up to twenty or thirty years old, there was no appearance of\nspurs; the trunk was covered with a green bark, and was studded with\ngreat triangular low spines, an inch in diameter. And, what had a\ncurious effect, the middle of the stem swelled into an ovate form, quite\nsymmetrical on all sides. But, as years passed, the ventricose form of\nthe trunk was gradually lost; the bark became of a hoary grey hue or\neven almost white; the three-sided prickles disappeared from the bole,\nand were retained only on the upper surfaces of the limbs; and the great\nlateral buttresses began to fill up the angles which had hitherto\nexisted between the trunk and the main horizontal and superficial roots.\n\nI called the noble tree before us an accumulation of vegetable cells.\nAnd viewed in that aspect, what an irresistible evidence of the lapse of\ntime does this vast organism present to us! since the whole of this\nimmense structure originated in a single cell, which, by repeated acts\nof self-division[59] (or, possibly, other modes of reproduction), has\ngradually built up the mass.\n\nYet such a retrospect would be most fallacious in the case before us,\nsince the plant, as a perfect compound organism, with its parts--root,\ntrunk, limbs and leaves, and its tissues--cellular, fibrous, and\nvascular, has been produced by the instantaneous putting forth of the\nDivine volition.\n\nOnce again. More gigantic even than the towering Ceiba, this immense\nLocust-tree (_Hymen\u00e6a_) appears to penetrate the very sky with its crowd\nof foliage, which is so remote from the earth, that our eyes cannot\navail to discern the forms of the leaves. The straight columnar trunk,\nlike some triumphal monument in the midst of a great metropolis, is of\nso vast a bulk that a dozen of such men as you and I could scarcely\nembrace it with stretched arms and joined hands.[60]\n\nCan our friend, the vegetable physiologist, help us here to form a\nnotion of the time which would be required for the production of this\ntree in the ordinary way? It is the last favour we will ask of him\nto-day. Come, Sir, give us your thoughts on the matter.\n\n_The Botanist._--\"There is a principle which, in trees of this\ncharacter, namely, such as are of exogenous structure, will determine\nthe age with very close accuracy. Each generation of leaves sends down\nwoody fibres, which unite into a cylinder on the outside of the wood\npreviously formed, and beneath the bark.\"\n\n\"Now, as these cylinders are in general sufficiently distinct, in those\ntrees which renew their leaves but once in a year, it will be enough to\ncount the concentric circles which appear on a transverse section of the\ntrunk, and we shall obtain the number of years during which the tree has\nexisted. In the case of this great Locust, the rule, to be sure, is\nrather difficult of application in that way; a transverse section of\nthis trunk would cost a little labour. But with this circular saw,\nwhich I always carry about with me for investigations of this sort, I\ncan take out a horizontal cylinder on each of two or three sides of the\ntree, by counting the layers in which I can form a tolerably accurate\nestimate of the number in the whole diameter.\n\n[Illustration: SECTION OF EXOGENOUS TREE.]\n\n\"See; in these cylinders, which do not materially differ, there are\nseventy-two layers in a foot, that is, each layer is one-sixth of an\ninch wide. The trunk is, at the part I have tested, about fifty feet in\ndiameter, or twenty-five feet in radius; which would therefore contain\njust eighteen hundred such layers. As the deposition of new wood,\nhowever, is generally more abundant in youth and middle life than in\nage, the layers are probably a little wider, that is, fewer in a given\nspace, as we approach the centre. For this we must make allowance, and\nmay conjecture that this tree is probably not less than one thousand\nfive hundred years old.\"\n\nNow whether the premises of the botanist will bear out this conclusion\nor not, is not a vital question. For the question at issue is, not, _How\nlong_ it has lived, but, _Whether it has lived at all_, before the\npresent moment. It is enough for our point that the tree does, in its\nconcentric zones, afford ocular evidence of successive epochs of growth.\nAnd the proof of this would be equally good, if ten layers were\ndeposited in a year, or if one deposit were made every ten years;\nequally good, if there were fifteen hundred zones, or if there were but\nfive. It would be easy to confirm the testimony of the zones by that of\nother parts of the structure. The dimensions of the tree itself bear a\nfixed and, to a certain extent, recognisable ratio to its age; every\nleaf on a given twig has been successively developed from a leaf-bud,\nthe opening of which and its elongation into a twig occupied, normally,\na definite period; each bough, each of those mighty limbs, was once a\ntwig, was once an undeveloped leaf-bud, whose expansion to its present\ncondition was a process, of which time was an inseparable and, within\ncertain limits, a mensurable element.\n\nIf, then, we were precluded from examining any other organism, as it\nproceeded from the formative hand of its Creator, than this single tree,\nwe should be amply warranted in inferring a past existence (be it longer\nor shorter, which is no matter) from the phenomena of its structure,\nwhich inference the fact of its creation would flatly contradict.\n\n\n\n\n\nVIII.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Invertebrate Animals._)\n\n     \"There is a kind of character in thy life\n     That to th' observer doth thy history\n     Fully unfold.----\" (_Shakspeare._)\n\n\nLeaving the vegetable kingdom, those organisms which, though beautiful\nindeed and instructive, are yet inanimate, let us seek others which are\nendowed with a higher style of life, a life which is distinguished by a\nmeasure of consciousness of the exterior world, and a perception of\nrelations to it. Let us look for animals.\n\nWe retrace our steps to the verge of the rippling sea, where the belt of\numbrageous Mangroves fringes its margin. Beneath the arching roots of\nthese are now reposing in the warm sunlit shallows many creatures which\nnumber this as the first day of their existence. It is their natal, or\nrather (to make a word) their _creatal_ day.\n\nHere is a specimen of the Sea-pen (_Pennatula_), closely resembling a\nrather thick and fleshy feather, with its quill-end inserted in the\ntenacious marl which constitutes the floor of the sea along this shore,\nand with the greater part of its body, including all the pinnated\nportion, erect, and waving lightly in the gentle swell of the bay. Its\ncentral stem is beset on each side with about twenty-five horizontal\npurple pinn\u00e6, and each pinna bears from five to fifteen polypes with\neight tentacles each.\n\nLet us wade out to yonder reef. See this great mass of Millepore,\ngrowing in thin irregular perpendicular plates, which join each other at\nvarious angles, so as to form a large open honeycomb-like structure,\nmuch resembling the second stomach of an ox. It is covered with what\nappears a thin stratum of fawn-coloured jelly, but this consists of\ninnumerable disks, which protrude from myriads of orifices not larger\nthan those produced by the punctures of a fine needle; as we may discern\nby touching the soft slimy surface, when the whole retires, and leaves\napparent only the white stony surface dotted with numberless holes,\nwithin which the disks have disappeared, and whence they will again\npresently re-appear.\n\nHere too is a massive shrub of stone, a noble example of the Muricated\nMadrepore. It consists of a great multitude of short tranches, which\nare themselves branched and branched again, every part covered with\nlittle mammillary warts, and pierced with innumerable holes in which\nstand radiating plates of the common stone. Out of these plated\norifices, especially those towards the tips of the branches, for the\nolder ones are empty and dead, we see perpetually peeping forth,\nexpanding for an instant, and then coyly withdrawing, lovely little\ngreen disks, surrounded with thread-like tentacles; and from the extreme\nend of each branch there protrudes one exactly similar to the rest in\nall respects, except that it is nearly twice as large. Here then are the\nliving architects; these have secreted within their gelatinous membranes\nthe calcareous atoms, whose aggregate forms the stony shrub before us.\n\nShall we try to estimate the number of polypes that have been occupied\nin building this tree? There are about a hundred branches, which, taken\none with another, and followed along the sinuous course of their many\nbranchlets, we may estimate to average a continuous length of eight feet\neach; that is, 800 feet of branch in all. Now we may consider these\nbranches as averaging a thickness of two inches and a half in\ncircumference, which gives us a surface of 24,000 square inches.\nFinally, there are about ten polype-cells in each square inch; and thus\nthere are or have been in this coral-mass, nearly a quarter of a million\nof polype inhabitants.\n\n[Illustration: MURICATED MADREPORE.]\n\nBut look at this dark crimson edifice of many stories, tier above tier,\neach horizontal floor of red stone sustained by a multitude of slender\ncylindrical pillars. When we look closely at them, we see that the\npillars are tubes, perforating one or more of the floors, from the\nlowest tier to the uppermost.\n\nHave we any clue to the age of these corals, or to that of either of\nthem, supposing we did not know that they have been created to-day? Not\ndefinitely, perhaps; but indefinitely we have, certainly. In the case of\nthe Sea-pen, the polypes have all been formed in succession; as also in\nthat of the stony Millepore and Madrepore, with this addition, that\nevery newly formed polype deposited an increase to the stony substance,\nwhich thus went on increasing till the great foliated or ramified mass\nthat we see was formed.[61] And so, with this series of floors and\npillars, which is the solid portion of another coral-polype, the\nOrgan-pipe (_Tubipora musica_).\n\n[Illustration: ORGAN-PIPE.]\n\nEvery one of these stories has been formed in succession. From the tips\nof some of the tubes we see protruding an elegant polype of an\nemerald-green hue, having eight starry tentacles, and giving off from\nits base an enveloping membrane, which spreads over the rim of the tube\nand descends on the outside to the floor. By means of this vascular\nmembrane, both tube and floor have been formed. Calcareous particles,\ndeposited, one by one, in its substance, gradually built up the tube of\nthe primary polype, or probably the tubes of the first series, the\nbasement or ground-floor. When these tubes had arrived at a certain\nheight, all simultaneously began to develope the fleshy membrane\nhorizontally, which expanded until that from each touched that from its\nneighbour, with which it united. Meanwhile the calcareous deposition\nwent on in this horizontal layer, and thus the first floor was made.\n\nNow from the living vascular upper surface of this layer sprang up at\ncertain spots buds,[62] offshoots of the common flesh, which soon rose\ninto columns, and, by a process of calcareous deposition, became tubes\nwith terminal polypes, which in turn spread out a horizontal layer, and\nthus the second floor was built. Hence a new race of polypes budded,\nwhich by and by formed the third floor; and so on in succession, until\nthe series had attained the height which we see.\n\nIf we assume one of these stories to be the growth of a year,[63] we\nhave ocular evidence in this specimen of six years' age, for here are\nsix successive floors. But no: for it was created complete, as we see\nit, this very hour.\n\nYonder goes a _Medusa_, pumping its way laboriously, yet not\nineffectively, just beneath the surface of the clear wave. It is a\ngreat affair, nearly a foot in diameter. Have we, from merely examining\nits appearance and structure, any criterion by which we can guess\nwhether it has lived an hour, or a year, or ten years? Surely we have;\nfor this mass of clear jelly is composed, like all other organic bodies,\nof cells, which have been gradually generated, by nutrition and\nassimilation, from the embryo.[64] This process must have occupied many\nmonths, if not several years; but the history of this Medusa did not\nbegin when it took its present umbrella-like form. Shall we trace it\nback a little farther?\n\nAt some time back, then, this creature detached itself as the terminal\none of many little saucer-like bodies, which had been for some time\npreviously forming by the gradual constriction of a thick fleshy stem.\nBefore the constriction began to be visible, this stem was the body of a\nwhite Hydraform polype, affixed by its base, and furnished at its free\nextremity with thirty-two tentacles. It had lived several years in this\nform, developing many Hydroid polypes, just like itself, by successive\ngemmations. Before it took this shape, which it assumed gradually, its\ntentacles being developed in geometrical progression, 32 from 16, from\n8, from 4,--it was a soft ovoid planule clothed with vibratile cilia,\nwhich swam freely in the sea, like an _Infusorium_.\n\nThus the physiologist would confidently assign to this Medusa an\nexistence of several years, as an independent organism; _nor could his\nconclusions be controverted_, except by the knowledge of the fact that\nthe Medusa _has been but just now created_.\n\nWe pass on. Here is an _Echinus_. Let it be borne in mind still, that we\nhave, _in idea_, the power of pursuing our researches on each creature\nat the moment which follows that of its creation; and that, when that\nactually was is of no consequence to our investigation.\n\nHere then is this new-made _Echinus sph\u00e6ra_, a somewhat conical globe of\nthree inches diameter, which is covered with a forest of spines,\npedicellari\u00e6, and suckers, and which glides majestically along, with an\neven but slow progress, over rock and reef. Its vitals are enclosed in a\nhollow box of calcareous shell, which is built up of nearly a thousand\npieces. This specimen, which is rather below than above the average\nsize, is formed of ten meridional rows of large plates (the\ninterambulacral), and ten of small (the ambulacral). The former series\nare each composed of thirty-two plates, making in all three hundred and\ntwenty; the latter have just double that number, making six hundred and\nforty; thus this Urchin's box is built up of nine hundred and sixty\nplates; every one of which is of definite shape and angle, and fits into\nthe angles of its fellows with the accuracy of the most skilfully\nconstructed cabinet-work.\n\nNow every one of these plates is an eloquent witness to the past\nlife-history of the Sea-urchin. For the reason why the enclosing box is\nmade of so many pieces is, that it might gradually expand and enlarge\nits capacity with the ever increasing requirements of the soft organs\nwithin. Every plate is enveloped by a vascular flesh, from which the\ncalcareous particles are deposited in a constant and perfectly uniform\nratio; and thus all the constituent plates are continually enlarged by\nadditions to both the internal and external surfaces (increasing their\nstrength), and to their sutural margins (increasing their combined\ncapacity), until the adult dimensions are attained.\n\nThe size of the new-born Echinus is not nearly equal to that of one of\nthese plates, and the progressive increase of the plates by deposition\non their edges has certainly taken several years to accomplish.[65]\n\nThe same result is inferrible from the structure of the spines with\nwhich every plate is armed. Each of these is a very long cone of\ncalcareous matter, arranged in minute oval chambers, divided by thin\nglassy walls, and deposited particle by particle from the thin stratum\nof living flesh with which each has been invested from its first\nembryonic development.\n\nBut of this _Echinus_, as of the _Medusa_ before, we find a history\nanterior to either box or spines. Its first appearance in this stage of\nexistence was as a barely-visible circular disk, constructed on the\noutside of the stomach of a singular transparent organism, much like a\nMedusa, but of a domular form with four or six legs, stiffened by\ncalcareous rods, and a crowning pinnacle. For some undefined time this\ngelatinous dome had been gliding with a stately movement through the\nopen sea, before there was the least trace of the disk, which afterwards\ngrew to the _Echinus_. In its earliest condition the dome itself was a\nsoft, spherical, mulberry-like _Infusorium_, covered with vibratile\ncilia; this altered its form to that of a three-sided pyramid, and this\nto the vaulted dome.\n\nClearly, therefore, we have a right to infer a past history of the\nUrchin, and that of not a few distinct stages. But no; the specimen has\ncommenced its history within an hour!\n\nYonder Feather-star (_Comatula_) notice; which, having just now started\ninto mature life at the almighty fiat of its Creator, goes careering\njoyously through the sea, expanding and contracting its many-jointed and\nfeathery arms, as if it had been accustomed to the alternation for a\nlong life, and ever and anon settling itself by grasping the points of\nrock with its dorsal claws. You would hardly think that those flexible\nand slender arms were made of stone: yet they are; every joint of the\nstems and of their pinn\u00e6 is a vertebra of stone (precious stones, you\nwill say--topaz and ruby--from their brilliant hues), which has been\nformed and deposited atom by atom, by the slow and gradual process of\nsecretion of calcareous matter; the lime having been primarily collected\nfrom the sea-water which held it in solution. At least, such is the\nphysiological deduction.\n\n[Illustration: COMATULA AND YOUNG.]\n\nBut there was a period in the _Comatula's_ history when it was not a\nfree-swimming star, but a lily-like flower of ten slender fringed\npetals, seated at the summit of a long stalk, with a central columnar\naxis of stone. Before that, the flower-head had a bud-like figure, and\nthe petals were minute and destitute of lateral fringes; and earlier\nstill, it was a tiny gelatinous club without any development of stone,\naffixed by a spreading base, and shooting forth from the top a few\npellucid processes. Earlier still, it was, no doubt, an infusory-like\ngemmule, clothed with cilia.\n\nThrough all these successive stages, which, of course, occupied a\nconsiderable period of time, we should certainly affirm the Feather-star\nto have passed, did we not know that it has this very hour burst into\nexistence.\n\nThat Panther, whose tawny fur studded with black rosettes appeared so\nbeautiful as he bounded with agile grace from glade to glade just as we\nemerged from the forest, contains within his intestines, though you\ncannot see it, a mature Tapeworm. The body of this parasite consists of\nsome hundreds of square flattened segments, each of which includes a\ncomplicated generative apparatus, equal to the production of thousands\nof fertile ova. Is not this an evidence of age? For, first of all,\nconsider that the formation of each of these hundreds of joints has been\na work of development from the anterior parts; and therefore they record\nas many distinct and successive processes as there are segments. And,\nsecondly, remember that the _T\u00e6nia_ did not commence existence as a\n_T\u00e6nia_, nor in the conditions in which it now exists, within the bowels\nof the Panther. It looks back to another form, and to another living\n_nidus_.\n\nThere was a time when this parasitic creature had no ribbon-like body of\nflattened generative segments. There was, indeed, the same curious head,\na tiny globose knob at the extremity of a slender neck, furnished with\nthe same array as now, of rows of hooks and sucking disks. But in place\nof the segments, the neck merged into a membranous bladder distended\nwith clear fluid. It was not a _T\u00e6nia_ then, but a _Cysticercus_.\n\nIts home was at that time the interior of a living animal on whose\nvitalized juices it was sustained, but that animal was widely different\nfrom its present patron. It was an Antelope, that cropped the wiry grass\nand aromatic shrubs of the arid plain.\n\nEarlier still, the germ of this _T\u00e6nia_ was an egg lying on the ground,\nhaving been discharged from the rectum of another Panther, in the bowels\nof which it had been developed by one of the segments of a former\n_T\u00e6nia_.\n\nLet us now trace the history of this organism onwards from the point at\nwhich we have arrived in our retrograde researches.\n\nThe parent _T\u00e6nia_, still snugly ensconced in its obscene abode,\npartially matured and then separated the ultimate generative segment,\ncontaining many thousands of ova, far advanced towards perfection. The\ndetached segment now became enclosed in the f\u00e6ces of the Carnivore, and\nwas at length discharged, enveloped in the pellet. The eggs, acquiring\nmaturity, were hatched, and the infant worms individually scattered\nthemselves among the surrounding herbage.[66]\n\nOne of these was devoured with the herbage by a grazing Antelope, and\nhaving safely escaped the perilous ordeals of mastication and\nrumination, passed into the stomach of that Ruminant, whence it soon\nmade its way by some unknown but unerring route to the liver, in the\nparenchyma of which organ it rapidly developed the cyst, which gave to\nthe present stage its proper character.\n\nThe Antelope fell a prey to the ferocious Cat; its flesh was quickly\ndigested in the stomach, but the gastric juice produced no effect on\nthe _Cysticercus_. This parasite had merely changed its residence for\none more commodious, or at least more suitable for its further\ndevelopment. It presently attached itself to the walls of the intestine\nby means of its oral hooks and suckers, and, getting rid of its\nvesicular sac, with its fluid contents, probably by absorption, it began\nto develop, joint by joint, that immense ribbon, which it possesses now,\nand which constitutes it a Tapeworm.\n\nSuch is the \"strange eventful history\" of this repulsive creature; a\nhistory legitimately deducible, in all its stages, from its\npresently-existing condition. But it is a history altogether illusory.\nThe _T\u00e6nia_ never was a _Cysticercus_: the Panther is as yet guiltless\nof capricide: it is this moment called into being, and the Tapeworm\nbegins existence within it.\n\nThis lump of red sandstone that has been rolled about in the sea, till\nall its points and angles are worn smooth, is now roughened again by the\nclose and firm adhesion of extraneous substance, in the form of a\ncluster of shelly pipes, which twine irregularly over the surface of the\nboulder, and then start up erect with open mouths. These are the tubes\nof a species of _Serpula_, and the worm itself is seen now slowly\nemerging from one of them, and introducing its conical stopper, and\nelegant fans of white and scarlet filaments, to the genial daylight.\n\nObserve, however, that the tubes are not of the same diameter\nthroughout. At the point where they start up from contact with the\nstone, they are considerably smaller than at the tip; and if we trace\nback the adherent portion along its tortuous course, we find that it\nconstantly diminishes until it is but a slender white thread of stone.\nNow this slender extremity was formed first; and as the worm itself\ngrew, so it progressively required a larger and yet a larger habitation;\nwhich was readily provided of the due dimensions, because the material,\nwhich is limestone, was secreted by the swollen collar of the worm, and\nbeing freely poured out as required, was moulded of the proper calibre\nby the rotatory motion of the animal, combined with the special use of\ncertain tactile organs for the purpose.\n\nThe shelly tubes themselves afford us ocular evidence not only of their\nprogressive formation, but also of the successive steps by which this\nwas effected. For at certain intervals of their length we perceive rings\nof the common stony substance, which mark the rim or mouth of the tube\nas it existed after each periodic increase. The mouth of the tube is, as\nwe see, slightly expanded in a trumpet fashion; but as the general\ncylindrical figure is to be maintained, the next deposit of calcareous\nmatter is not made at the very edge of the lip, but on a ring a little\nway within the margin, whence it is carried up, leaving the former\nmargin slightly projecting.\n\n[Illustration: SERPULA.]\n\nWho could hesitate to assert that a history of past time is legibly\nwritten in the annulations of these stony tubes? And yet the creatures,\nwith their tubes, have been but this instant created.\n\nBut here is a tube of quite another construction, though inhabited by a\nkindred worm. It is wholly built up of sand, the inimitable architecture\nof the indwelling _Terebella_, who has thus succeeded in performing a\ntask which defied the efforts of that too industrious artizan,--the\nfamiliar of the renowned Michael Scott.[67] Our worm has certainly spun\na rope of sand, and one which holds together with surprising tenacity.\n\nThe instrument which our little architect wrought with are the long\ntentacles, which, like a tangled tuft of yellow sewing-cotton, twist and\ntwine over the floors of sandy pools. Nothing at first sight seems less\nadequate for the purpose than those very slender, soft, and flexible\nthreads. Dr. Williams shall tell us how they are used. \"They consist of\nhollow flattened tubular filaments, furnished with strong muscular\nparietes. The band may be rolled longitudinally into a cylindrical form,\nso as to inclose a hollow cylindrical space, if the two edges of the\nband meet; or a semi-cylindrical space, if they only imperfectly meet.\nThis inimitable mechanism enables each filament to take up and firmly\ngrasp, _at any point of its length_, a molecule of sand; or, if placed\nin a linear series, _a row_ of molecules. But so perfect is the\ndisposition of the muscular fibres at the extreme free end of each\nfilament, that it is gifted with the two-fold power of acting on the\nsucking and on the muscular principle. When the tentacle is about to\nseize an object, the extremity is drawn in, in consequence of the sudden\nreflux of fluid in the hollow interior; by this movement a cup-shaped\ncavity is formed, in which the object is securely held by atmospheric\npressure; this power is, however, immediately aided by the contraction\nof the circular muscular fibres. Such, then, are the marvellous\ninstruments by which these peaceful worms construct their\nhabitations.\"[68]\n\nSince the slender tentacles are the implements by which the sand-tube is\nthus built up, it is manifest that the existence of the tube must be\nsubsequent to the existence of the tentacles. But the _Terebella_ was at\none time without tentacles; so that its history certainly reaches back\nto a date anterior to the existence of a tube. Several stages of life\nhave intervened between that distinguished by the present worm-form,\nand its infant condition, when it swam as a ciliated undivided monad.\n\nSo, at least, we conclude from physiological data; but our conclusions\nare false, because contradicted by the fact that the mature animal with\nits case has been just now created.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nLet us forsake the ocean-shore, and walk again through the glades of the\nvirgin forest. A White-ant (_Termes_) crosses our path, and, by tracking\nhim home, we speedily discover his dwelling, an enormous structure\ncomposed of gnawed wood cemented with an animal secretion, and formed\ninto thin but very firm and hard layers. Swarms of labourers are passing\nin and out; and, on our breaking away a portion of the edifice, out come\ncrowding the warriors, with formidable jaws extended widely, ready for\nthe fight. In the interior we find numerous chambers stored with food,\nand nurseries occupied by young and eggs, the number of which is every\nhour increasing by the oviposition of the gravid female,--the queen of\nthe city--who is lodged in an apartment in the very centre of the whole.\n\nThe entire edifice has been built around her; she is the hope of the\ncolony, the only mother in this vast assemblage. It is therefore\nthrough her that we must look for a past history; and in her we find it.\nSome months ago, when she was not more than one thousandth part as large\nas she is now, though then adult, she migrated from some other city not\nless populous than this is now. It was just before the periodical rains,\nwhen, at the time of the great annual swarming, myriads of winged males\nand females were evolved from the pupa state, and flew out from their\nnative city. This individual female was found by some of the workers\nthat now compose this colony, and was immediately selected to be at once\ntheir prisoner and their queen.\n\nWe thus trace our great egg-laying Termes to a city of last year's\nbuilding, in which for a time she was in an immature condition as a\nnymph, and before that passed a still less-developed stage as a larva.\nHence her life-history goes yet farther back to an egg, originally laid\nby a former female in exactly the same circumstances as those in which\nwe find this guarded and immured individual.\n\nThus we reason; but the female, with her host of attendants, and the\nhouse, which is inseparable from their present stage of existence, has\nbeen created to-day.\n\nSee that creature which with loud ringing hum is whirling round and\nround the tassel-like blossoms of this noble _Eugenia_. You would think\nit a bird from its massive size, but it flashes and sparkles in the sun,\nlike a great jewel. Now it suddenly alights on one of the crimson\nflowers, and you may perceive that it is a beetle;--a beetle of vast\nsize, and glittering like a lump of burnished metal;--it bears the name\nof Goliath,--a giant clad in polished armour.\n\nThis is his first hour of existence; now for the first time has his\nnervous system responded to the stimulus of the sweet air and genial\nsunshine. An hour ago he had no nervous system; no system of any sort;\nno life; no being; no anything;--he was not until this hour.\n\nYet if we were to ask a friend conversant with entomology his opinion on\nthe age of this insect, he would immediately give it; not, however, as\nan opinion, for he would repudiate the uncertainty which such a word\nimplies, but as an indubitable fact, resting on the infallible grounds\nof constant observation and undeviating experience.\n\n[Illustration: GOLIATH BEETLE, AND PUPA CASE.]\n\n\"This fine _Goliathus_,\" he would say, \"has not long, probably, emerged\nfrom a hollow case of oval form, made of particles of earth agglutinated\ntogether by a secretion from the mouth of the larva, and concealed under\nthe surface of the ground. Within that sepulchre it has left its\ncerements,--the shrivelled skin of the pupa, in which it had been\nwrapped up motionless like a mummy, for several weeks prior to its\nappearance as a glittering beetle. The construction of the oval cell was\nthe last act of the larva, a thick, massy, heavy-bodied grub, which had\nfattened for years by feeding on the roots of plants beneath the soil.\nFour years passed away[69] while yon beetle lay on its side, darkly\nlabouring at this occupation; and before that it was a minute egg for\nsome weeks. The specimen before us cannot be far short of five years\nold.\"\n\nNo such thing: the witness is at fault: the _Goliathus_ is not _an hour_\nold.\n\nTake notice of the swarm of Gnats, which, like a dim cloud, are uniting\nin choral dance and song in the beam of the setting sun. Every member of\nthe band that \"winds his shrill horn,\" has had an aquatic before he had\nan a\u00ebrial existence. A week was spent, in lobster-shape, with two\nbreathing tubes on the summit of his body, in passing alternately from\nthe bottom to the top of yonder stagnant pool, and then back from the\ntop to the bottom. And a month was occupied in pretty nearly the same\nemployment, but in another mask,--in fish-like form, with the\nstar-tipped breathing-tube projecting from the side of the tail. But for\nsome months earlier still it was a little lenticular egg, which was\nagglutinated with a number of others into an oval concave boat, that\nfloated to and fro on the surface of the pool.\n\nAnd there was something worth observing in that tiny skiff of eggs; for\nit did, in its artful construction, carry the evidence of time back to a\nformer generation. The eggs individually and separately would have sunk\nto the bottom of the water; it was, however, essential to their life\nthat they should be in contact with the air as well as with the water.\nHence they were so arranged in the aggregate, that the mass should swim,\nthough the constituent individuals could not. To effect this, the parent\nGnat, resting on the calm surface of the pool, crossed her two hind\nlegs, and laid an egg perpendicularly in the angle so made: others were\nadded in succession, all maintaining the perpendicular position, all\nglued together by a cement that resists water, but so arranged, the\ncrossed legs being still the mould, that the outline should be\nspindle-shaped, while the summits of the central eggs, being a little\nlower than those of the outer ones, gave a concavity to the boat. So\nbuoyant was it when finished, and the mother's legs withdrawn, that even\na drop of water falling full upon it from above, would have failed to\nsubmerge it. There it floated, week after week, and month after month,\nall through the winter, till the genial sun of spring hatched the\nfish-like larv\u00e6 to begin their wriggling existence beneath the surface.\n\nNow may we not say with confidence, that the sounding-winged insect\nlooks back to the pupa, the pupa to the larva, the larva to the\negg-boat? And more, that the form of the boat,--a form so essential that\nit could not have lived without it,--looked back to the crossed feet of\nthe mother-gnat, the impress of whose angle its extremities sustained?\n\nOf course we might reason thus: but yet we should be at fault; for the\nringing swarm of merry Gnats has been this very evening created.\n\n[Illustration: LARVA OF CASE-FLY.]\n\nThe Case-flies (_Phryganea_) that look like delicate moths of\nsober-brown hue, flitting over the surface of the pond, have, like the\nGnats, spent a considerable time under water. When they were larv\u00e6, they\nindustriously collected small shells, fragments of stone, bits of reed,\nand the like matters, and, connecting them together with strong silk,\nmade out of them slender tubes, in which they sheltered their soft\nbodies from harm, while their hard polished heads and shoulders\nprojected from the open end. And after having lived through the winter\n(at least, but I rather think more than _one_ winter) in this state,\neach closed up the entrance of his castle, by spinning across its open\nend, a transverse screen of lattice-work, made of very strong and stout\nsilk, which, while it should serve the purpose of keeping out\nevil-minded intruders, during the helpless inaction of the pupa, should\nat the same time admit the free ingress and egress of water necessary\nfor its respiration.\n\nThe life of the larva, and the exercise of these, its curious instincts,\nare, together with the duration of the pupa stage, inseparable\nprecedents of the imago state in which we now observe the flying\ninsects. No, not \"inseparable;\" for in this case, at least, they had no\nexistence in time; they are prochronic developments.\n\n[Illustration: MELICERTA.]\n\nIn this pond at our feet there is an object worthy of a moment's\nobservation, minute though it is, for it is only visible as a speck to\nthe unassisted eye. On one of the whorl-filaments of this tuft of\n_Myriophyllum_, there stands up a cylindrical tube, firmly adherent to\nthe plant by its foot, but free at its upper end. Small as it is, this\nchimney is built up of hundreds of pellets, solid, round, and yellow;\nplaced in symmetrical order, and firmly cemented together. What has\nmade this tube? Ha! here is the little architect ready to answer for\nhimself; he thrusts out his head and shoulders from his chimney-top, and\nannounces his scientific cognomen as _Melicerta ringens_.\n\nLook! he is in the very act of building now. Did you see him suddenly\nbow down his head and lay a brick on the top of the last course? And now\nhe is busy making another brick; his mould is a tiny cup-shaped cavity\njust below his chin; his material the floating floccose atoms of\nvegetable refuse. Cilia along his flower-like face collect these atoms\ninto a stream, and pour them into the cup; and cilia within the cup\nwhirl them rapidly round and round in many rotations, until with the aid\nof mucus they are somewhat consolidated into a round pellet. The brick\nis made, and nothing remains but that it be deposited next the former,\nin regular progression, and this is done by the tiny [Greek: tekt\u00f4n],\nsuddenly bending his head forward, and bringing the chin-cup with exact\nprecision to the spot.\n\nAnd how long has he been engaged in this piece of work? Little more than\na day. It was commenced yesterday, when the creature was not more than\none-third as large as he is now. But he had lived a few hours before the\ncommencement of his work. He was a rover before he began to be a\nhouse-keeper. In that early stage of youth and freedom, before he had\nmade up his mind to settle in life, he had no chin-cup, no flower-like\nface, and of course no tube. A cylindrical gelatinous pellucid worm, he\nissued out of the egg, with a brush of cilia on his crown, and danced\nwaywardly through the water. While thus occupied, his form underwent\nsome preliminary modifications, and at length was sufficiently matured,\nto enable him to choose a spot for the passing of his future life, and\nto commence the building on which he is still engaged.\n\nNot so. The pellet which he deposited when we began to look at him, was\nthe first he had ever made; he had been created but that moment; and all\nthe previous pellets of the case had been called into being just as we\nsaw them. They were built up prochronically.\n\nI tear a piece of bark from the trunk of this half-decayed tree, and\nhave disclosed amidst the rank-smelling damp and rotten wood, a large\n_Julus_, a slow-moving creature, with some hundred-and-fifty little\ntwinkling feet. As this specimen has attained its adult condition, it\nmust be at least two years old; for it does not acquire its\nreproductive organs and perfect development till that age.[70]\n\nThis creature has passed through a rather curious history of evolutions.\nThe egg from which it was produced was lodged in a chamber excavated by\nthe parent, a few inches below the surface of the rotten mould. From\nthis egg proceeded a little kidney-shaped body, without limbs or motion,\ncompletely enveloped in a swathe of delicate transparent membrane. About\na fortnight it remained in this helpless state, during which its organs\nhad been forming out of the constituent cells, by repeated subdivision,\nand definite arrangement. At length it burst its cerement, and a minute\nJulus appeared, not more than 1/200th of an inch in length, composed\nof a head with antenn\u00e6, and a body of eight segments, of which the first\nthree carried each a pair of legs.\n\nAll the multitudinous limbs which we see in this adult have been\nproduced in successive moultings, and all the numerous segments have\nbeen produced by the subdivision of the last but one,--that is the joint\npreceding the anal one,--six at a time.\n\nBy the time the little animal was ready for the second sloughing, that\nis, in about a week after the preceding, three more pairs of feet were\nseen, which had budded from the fourth, fifth, and sixth segments, but\nwhich were as yet closely packed down beneath the investing skin; the\nseventh segment also was obscurely marked into six divisions. The skin\nwas now thrown off, and these changes were perfected; the little Julus\nnow had six pairs of feet, and thirteen segments.\n\nThis process was repeated again and again; the new limbs always\ndeveloping on the segments last produced, and six new segments being\nalways formed out of the existing penultimate. And by this gradual\nsuccession of development, the animal has attained the number of limbs\nand segments which we now perceive. The antenn\u00e6 and the eyes have\nlikewise passed through successive stages.\n\nWe have a right to infer the lapse of a period sufficient to produce\nthese changes, for we see their indubitable results; but our inference\nwould only lead us astray, because we have not allowed for a disturbing\ninfluence,--that of the Law of Creation. This is the Julus's first hour\nof life.\n\nSee, on the trunk of that towering _Cedrela_, a round hole, out of which\na large Beetle is in the act of emerging. It is a noble _Buprestis_,\nencased in glittering mail, of the most refulgent metallic splendour,\ncrimson, gold, and green. Can we find any clue to his age? Yes: the\nwhite grab has rioted and fattened in its burrows in the timber of this\ntree for many years; ever gnawing away with its horny auger-like jaws\nthe solid wood in tortuous galleries, which constantly enlarged, as it\nprogressively grew, while its wake, as it advanced, was partially filled\nby its ordure. The old tree is, no doubt, perforated, through and\nthrough, by its winding corridors, as large as your middle finger. As\nsoon as the vermin had passed this his nonage, which, as I say, may have\noccupied a dozen years at least,[71] he sank into his short pupa-sleep,\nand here we see him paying his first visit to the light of day.\n\nTrue; this is his first experience of daylight, and indeed of anything;\nfor all the pupa-sleep and the larva-labour were prochronic in this\ncase. The Beetle is just created.\n\nHark to that hollow roar! There is no mistaking that majestic sound. It\nis the voice of the many-sounding sea. Yonder through the trees we catch\na glimpse of its shining face, and here we are at the verge of the\ncliffs, against whose feet the waves are breaking in white foam. We\nwill clamber down to the rocks.\n\nIn this weed-fringed tide-pool there is a fine specimen of the\nShore-crab (_Carcinus moenas_). It is a male just arrived at the\nperfection of adult age; its carapace smooth and wholly dark-green in\nhue, its under parts rufous orange. Its claws. are large and sharp; and\nthe promptitude with which it presents these formidable weapons,\nextended to the utmost, shows how conscious it is of its warlike powers.\n\nTo all appearance this Crab is several years old;[72] I mean in this his\npresent perfect or imago form. When this form was first assumed, the\ndiameter of the carapace was not more than an eighth of an inch; it is\nnow two inches; a great many periodical sloughings of the crust must\nhave occurred to accomplish this sixteen-fold increase.\n\nBut four distinct metamorphoses were passed before the commencement of\nthis form. There was the Grapsoid form with the outline of the carapace\nnearly parallel-sided, and the dentations on the sides. Before this\nthere was the Megalopa form, with the carapace ovate, and the abdomen\nprojecting behind. Before this there was the Zoea form, with the\ncarapace rising into a tall erect spine, sessile eyes, no claws, and the\nabdomen a slender jointed cord ending in a triangular plate. And before\nthis, there was the egg, which was laid by the mother Crab, and carried\nby her for a considerable time attached to the false feet of her\nabdomen.\n\nAll these evidences of age, clear and unanswerable though they are, are\nyet fallacious, because the Crab has been created but this morning.\n\nOn this sea-washed branch of a tree, which has been blown off by some\ntempest, and carried into the ocean, there is a single Barnacle\n(_Lepas_). It consists of a hand of many pairs of fringed fingers,\nprotected by a shell of five pieces, and a long flexible cartilaginous\nstalk, by the lower extremity of which it adheres to the timber.\n\nThe shelly valves are all crossed by strongly marked lines running over\ntheir surfaces in a direction parallel with each other, and with the\nouter margins of each valve. These, like the corresponding foliations in\nthe tube of the _Serpula_, indicate the successive stages of growth; the\noutlines of every valve having stood at each of these growth lines in\nsuccession. On each of the scutal valves in this individual I can count\nabout 260 growth-lines: if we suppose one of these to be made in a\nweek,[73] and the increase to proceed uniformly throughout the year, we\nmust conclude the valve to have been just five years in making.\n\n[Illustration: LEPAS.]\n\nThis animal, like others we have already examined, had, moreover, a\nhistory before the first vestige of a valve was formed. It had passed\nthrough several metamorphoses; in its pupa stage it had the form of a\n_Cypris_, and in this condition it first became adherent to the timber:\nbefore this it was a larva, having a general resemblance to another\nWaterflea, the _Cyclops_, especially in its younger stages: in this\nstate it moulted several times. Nor was this the beginning of its life;\nfor there was the still earlier condition common to all these classes of\nanimals, viz. that of the egg, which was laid and carried for some time\nby the parent Barnacle, and at length hatched while within the valves of\nher shell.\n\nThus, through a course of several years we are able to trace back the\nexistence of this Cirriped, to its parent of a former generation. But\nour conclusions are altogether vitiated by the simple fact that this\nindividual is the first of its species; it never had a parent; it never\nwas an egg.\n\nFrom the rocky pool before us I have picked up a rough pebble, the\nsurface of which is incrusted with a delicate work of stony lace. This\nfabric, too fine to be resolved by the unassisted eye, consists of the\noval cells of a species of _Lepralia_. There are some hundreds of cells\nin this patch, which altogether does not cover a square inch of the\npebble; and they are all made after one pattern, and set in a very\nregular manner, in quincunx. Each is a minute slipper-shaped box of\nstone, with the orifice set round with spines for the protection of the\ninmate, a transparent, elegant, and sensitive Polypide, which bears on\nits head a coronet of ciliated tentacles.\n\nI am not going to describe the interesting structure and economy of this\natom of life; but merely wish to direct your attention to one\npoint,--the evidence which it affords of the lapse of past time.\n\nEvery one of these hundreds of stony cells, together with its living\ntenant, was normally produced by a process of gemmation; each having\nbudded forth from the side of its predecessor as a knob of clear\ngelatinous flesh, in the midst of which was developed, first the cell,\nand then the polypide,--the latter appearing in a rudimentary condition,\nand gradually acquiring its proper organs, before the orifice of the\ncell was opened.\n\nI said every one of the cells was thus formed; but I ought to have\nexcepted a single cell, which, though in nowise differing from the rest\nin form or structure, had a very different origin. This was the primal\ncell, and its beginning was as follows:\n\nA minute atom of a scarlet hue, and of a semi-elliptical shape, was one\nday whirling round and round with rapid gyrations in the open sea. It\nwas of soft consistence, covered with strongly vibrating cilia, and\nfurnished with some stouter set\u00e6. After enjoying its motile instincts\nawhile, it settled down on this pebble, and became stationary. Presently\nit secreted and deposited calcareous matter around at, like a coating of\nthe thinnest glass, the red parenchyma receding from the hyaline wall\ntowards the centre.\n\nSoon an orifice with thickened edges appeared on the upper side, and\nminute spines grew from the edges, which quickly lengthened. It was now\na _Lepralia_ cell, and now the polypide was developed, and protruded its\nmouth from the orifice, surrounded by its elegant bell of ciliate\ntentacles. This solitary cell became the parent of hundreds more, by the\ngemmative process which I have already described.\n\nBut the red swimming atom;--whence came that? Well, it was shot out from\nthe interior of a previous _Lepralia_, the result not of a gemmative but\nof a generative act. It originated in another patch similar to the one\nwhich incrusts this pebble, and that, in like manner, and by exactly\nsimilar stages, looked back to an anterior patch, and so on.\n\nPlausible as this inference is, it is false; for the little aggregation\nof cells and polypides has been called into existence by the Divine\n_fiat_, this very instant.\n\nWe are still at the sea-shore. Within the long and narrow crevices into\nwhich these low-lying ledges of shale are split, innumerable tufts of\nsea-weed,--olive, purple, and green,--are perpetually waving in the wash\nof the sea. On one of these branching shrubs of _Phyllophora_, there is\nadhering, apparently cast there by accident, an irregular mass of\npellucid jelly. It firmly cleaves to the alga, enclosing the bases of\nseveral branches within its firm but gelatinous substance.\n\nThis knob of jelly is a compound animal of the genus _Botryllus_, and it\nhas just been created as we see it. In order to understand its nature,\nlook at it more closely.\n\nEnclosed in the clear purplish-grey jelly, in the midst of scattered\nlighter specks, we see several star-like figures of bright hues, in\nwhich yellow and red are predominant; the symmetrical arrangement of\nwhich pleases the eye, and reminds us of some ornamental pattern\ndesigned by human art. Each star is composed of several (three, seven,\nten or more) pear-shaped animals, with their smaller ends meeting in\nthe centre around a common orifice, from which a current of water is\ndischarged.\n\nNow this assemblage of animals bears evidence of progressive\ndevelopment. Some time ago a tiny egg was discharged from a parent\n_Botryllus_, which presently produced a little active tadpole-like\nlarva, called a \"spinule.\" This swam actively by means of its wriggling\ntail; but at length it settled head downward on this piece of sea-weed.\nImmediately the head adhered, by an effused cement, to its support; the\ntail now gradually disappeared; and the round head, in the midst of a\nmass of jelly-like cement, began to display two orifices on its surface.\nIt soon assumed a pear-like shape, and thus the first _Botryllus_ was\nformed.\n\nFrom the side of this \"pear,\" another was developed by gemmation, and a\nthird on the opposite side; the smaller ends of all were in contact, and\nthe orifices of these extremities began to merge into one; while the\nlarge ends diverged. A fourth and a fifth \"pear\" were successively\nproduced in the same mode, until a star or \"system\" was formed.\nMeanwhile the surrounding mass of living jelly had been commensurately\nenlarging, and a new _Botryllus_, separate from the other star, had been\nproduced in the jelly, which was the commencing point of a second\nsystem; and thus, by degrees, the compound mass of systems has grown to\nits present state of development.\n\n[Illustration: BOTRYLLUS.\n\n_a_, portion of one system and of a mass, on _Phyllophora rubens_; _b_,\nan egg _c_, spinule; _d_, the same, attached; _e_, the tail absorbed;\n_f_, the young _Botryllus_. All magnified.]\n\nThis process has been one of time: the adhesion of the \"spinule\" took\nplace in about sixteen hours after its escape from the egg. The\nappearance of the two orifices was when the little animal was four days\nold; and by the end of a week a second \"pear\" had budded. The attainment\nof the present condition may have occupied about six months.\n\nNay; time has been no element in this development; it is prochronic\ndevelopment; it is the development of creation, not of nature.\n\nBehold that ruffling of the smooth surface of the water; it is caused\nevidently by the forcible ejection of a current from some source a\nlittle way beneath the surface. Yes, it proceeds from the orifice in\nthis mass of calcareous grit; where the protruding pipe of shell\nindicates the snug fortress of a _Clavagella_. I will carefully break\naway a little of the soft stone, and we shall see the curious structure\nmore clearly. Ha! I have split off a piece which nicely exposes the\nwhole burrow, without having materially injured the creature or his\nshell.\n\nYou see it is a bivalve Mollusk with one valve firmly imbedded and\ncemented into the stony wall of its chamber. But the hinder end of this\nvalve is continued into a shelly tube, intended to protect the siphons,\nwhich is carried through the gallery forming the entrance into the\nchamber, and opens by a wide orifice in the free water outside. It is\nto this tube that I call your attention.\n\n[Illustration: CLAVAGELLA.]\n\nYou observe that on its outer surface there are several foliated\nexpansions of the shelly substance, surrounding it like so many frills\nat pretty regular intervals. Each of these foliations is a permanent\nrecord of a certain epoch. The terminal one is the margin of the\ntube-wall everted. The one below this was at some past period the\neversion of the margin at what was at that time the extremity. The third\nfrill had in like manner terminated the tube still earlier; and so with\nthe fourth and fifth. It is impossible to look at these expansions, and\nnot to believe that they have been formed in succession, in this way, by\nthe periodic growth of the tube.\n\nThere was a time when, the first frill was not commenced; when the\ncreature was a Mollusk with simple valves. But even this was not the\nbeginning of its history. It was as a swimming Infusory with a broad\nciliated disk, and a lashing _flagellum_, that the creature commenced\nits independent career; and it was doubtless in this condition[74] that\nit found its way into the burrow of some _Saxicava_. Here its tiny\ntransparent valves were secreted; the left valve was soon cemented to\nthe chamber; and then the creature began to secrete and form the tube\naround its siphons, which was progressively enlarged, and adorned at\nevery stage of elongation by these witnessing frills--whose testimony is\nrecorded in imperishable stone.\n\nWhat can be more irresistible than such evidence as this? And yet we\nmust take exception to it on the ground that this is the very hour of\nthe animal's creation.\n\n[Illustration: DIONE VENERIS.]\n\nThe elegant spinous shell-fish that we discern yonder, half-buried in\nthe sandy floor of the sea--I mean that lilac-tinted Prickly Venus\n(_Dione Veneris_) needs no shelly protection for its siphons, which, as\nyou may observe, are protruded to a great length. But a lesson not less\ninstructive than that taught by the tube-frills of the _Clavagella_, is\ninculcated by the valves of the _Dione_. Near the hinder margin of each\nvalve there is a ridge which runs from the beak to the front edge, a\nridge which bears the series of long slender shelly spines, that imparts\nsuch a charm to this shell.\n\nEach of these spines records an interval in the growth of the shell.\nThere are sixteen distinctly enumerable; each of which may possibly mark\na year's growth. The increase of bivalves, however, is slow; and it may\nbe that a longer interval than a year has intervened between spine and\nspine. For if we look more closely at this beautiful shell, we see that\nthe whole exterior of both valves is marked with concentric foliated\nridges, which are also indubitable lines of growth; and that these are\ntwice or thrice as numerous as the spines, from one to five being\nintercalated between those which support the prolongations of the shelly\nsubstance.\n\nEach of these concentric lines has a history. Every line, as well as\nevery spine, has been produced by a protrusion and eversion of the\nglanduligerous edge of the mantle, which then secreted and poured out a\ncopious deposit of calcareous matter along the margin of the previously\nexisting valve. In this species each periodic deposit took the form of a\nridge slightly elevated above the general surface; and, because the\nturned up margin of the mantle invested the edge of the valve already\nformed, therefore the new layer, with its elevated ridge, was concentric\nwith the last edge, which was concentric with the previous one, and so\non, the common centre of all being the beak (_umbo_) at the back of the\nvalve.\n\nThe spines were formed in a manner essentially similar. At every second\nor third period of increase, the margin of the mantle, which is very\nversatile and protrusile, was thrust out, at the point which corresponds\nto the spines, into a long fleshy groove, by the reduplication of its\nedge. Within this groove the calcareous secretion was poured out; and\nafter it had been allowed a few moments to harden or \"_set_,\" the\nmantle-groove was cautiously withdrawn, and a new spine was exposed, as\na produced end to the foliated ridge.\n\nYet, though this is the normal and natural mode of production, both of\nthe concentric line and of the spines, it would be illusory to conclude\nthat they have been so produced in the present example. The entire\nformation of the _Dione_ before us has been ab-normal and\npreter-natural: it has been _created_, not _born_: the whole development\nso legibly written on the shell has been prochronic.\n\nThere goes the Scorpion Stromb (_Pteroceras scorpio_), crawling over the\nrocks with protruded head and tentacles, and bearing his massive house\non his back. This shelly house of his will afford us a good example of\nstructural development.\n\nThe great dilated lip, and the long finger-like processes of its edge,\nhad no existence in the youthful days of the shell; they are marks of\nadult age: when young, the shell was simply spiral, with a thin straight\nlip bounding a narrow aperture.\n\nObserve also a far more beautiful creature by its side, the Tiger Cowry\n(_Cypr\u00e6a tigris_). Its shell is now entirely enveloped in the meeting\nwings of the great fleshy mantle, which is mottled with changing hues;\nand its foot or crawling disk covers a space three or four times as\nlarge as the shell. On lifting it in our hand, the whole of this array\nof soft flesh has been rapidly retracted, and has wholly disappeared\nwithin that very narrow orifice, bordered with toothed projections, on\nthe under side of the shell, which we can hardly believe capable of\nreceiving a twentieth part of the bulk that has vanished within it. And\nnow we see nothing but the shell, with its smooth rounded back, marked\nwith dark spots, its white inferior surface cleft by this longitudinal\ndenticulate aperture, and its brilliant porcellanous varnish over the\nwhole.\n\nNow here is evidence of change and progress again. This Cowry-shell is\nvery unlike that of an Olive, with a simple spire, an oval body, a\nsmooth thin lip, and a wide orifice; and as unlike that of a Nautilus.\nYet it has passed through both of these stages before it was disguised\nas we see it now. When it escaped from the egg-shell, it was a minute\nPteropod, with two great ciliated disks, inhabiting a transparent\nnautiloid shell, and swimming giddily about in a revolving fashion. By\nand by, the tiny shell increased, and the outer whorl lengthened,\nputting on a long-oval figure. Then--that is, after a considerable\nperiod occupied in increasing the dimensions of the shell in this\nform--it began to assume the adult appearance. The outer lip, which had\nhitherto been thin, gradually thickened and encroached upon the spire,\nand the mantle began to secrete and deposit on the outer surface the\ncoat of glassy enamel.\n\nAt length the thickening of the lips proceeded to such an extent as\nalmost to conceal the spire, and to reduce the aperture to a narrow\nline, the edges of which were now thickly plaited with the tooth-like\nridges so characteristic of the genus. The lobes of the mantle now\nprotrude through this aperture; and, expanding on each side, have\ndeposited all over the exterior of the shell a coat of glassy enamel,\nstudded with dark round spots or clouds, which entirely conceals the\nsurface with the markings that were formerly visible upon it.\n\n[Illustration: MUREX TENUISPINA.]\n\nYonder Thorny Woodcock (_Murex tenuispina_) is a still more striking\nshell than either, and one whose periodic growths are peculiarly well\nmarked. It is covered at regular intervals with rows of shelly spines,\nstill longer and more numerous than those we lately admired in the\n_Dione_. Each series crowns a thickened ridge, which runs across the\nwhorl, as regards the direction of its growth, but longitudinally as\nregards the general figure of the shell.\n\nNow, the increase of the shell in the Univalves is performed almost\nexactly as in the Bivalves; namely, by the protrusion and eversion of\nthe mantle on the existing edge. And, therefore, each of these thorny\nridges, separated as they are by an interval of just two-thirds of a\nwhorl, marks the termination of a new growth, the shelly matter rising\nup at the margin in this thickened ridge, which bristles with elongated\npoints.\n\nIn this specimen we can trace ten such ridges, whence we legitimately\ninfer ten distinct periods through which this animal has passed, besides\nthe nautiloid stage under which all the creatures of this Class commence\nexistence.\n\nYet, since each of these three univalves has been this day created,\nthese inferences are deceptive. The Scorpion-shell was _never_ otherwise\nthan dilated and digitated. The Cowry has _never_ had a lip that was\nnot thickened, nor an exterior that was not porcellanous. The Woodcock\nhas _never_ known a moment in which its thorns were less numerous than\nthey are now.\n\nNotice that fine round shell carried along the floor of the sea, by\nmeans of a great fleshy tortoiseshell-coloured[75] body, which, with a\nhead of many spreading tentacles applied to the ground, crawls with a\ntolerably quick progress.[76] It is the Pearly Nautilus.\n\nThe amplitude of the beautiful nacreous shell is by no means a measure\nof the dimensions of the animal; for this merely sits within the shallow\nmouth, like a Welsh fisherman in his coracle. If we remove the creature,\nwe shall find the cavity bounded by a pearly floor, in the centre of\nwhich is a slender tube running down from it. On breaking away this\nfloor, we expose an empty chamber, with a similar pearly floor, through\nwhich passes the shelly tube, continued through the middle of the\nchamber, and running down to the next. Thus we should find the whole\ninterior of the shell occupied by a series of these empty chambers,\nfifty or upwards in number, each less than its predecessor (rather\n_successor_, if we regard them in the order of development), until we\ncan trace them no longer in the minute centre of the spire.\n\nWithout dwelling on the function of these chambers, farther than to say\nthat they appear admirably contrived to make the animal with its shell\neither heavier or lighter than the surrounding fluid, by forcing water\ninto them through the tube, and thus condensing the contained air, or by\nrelaxing the pressure, and allowing the elasticity of the air to exclude\nthe water,--our business is just with the formation of the septa, as an\nevidence of periodic development.[77]\n\n\"The septa are formed periodically, but it must not be supposed that the\nshell-muscles ever become detached, or that the animal moves the\ndistance of a chamber all at once. It is most likely that the\n_adductors_ grow only in front, and that a constant waste takes place\nbehind, so that they are always moving onward, except when a new septum\nis to be formed; the _septa_ indicate periodic _rests_.\"[78]\n\nThese periodic alternations of rest and action, however, it is obvious,\ncan never have really existed in an organism which has but this instant\nbeen created. The appearances, therefore, which indicate them, are\nillusory, considered as testimonies to actual time.\n\nYou are aware that what is often spoke of as the \"bone\" in this\nCuttlefish (_Sepia officinalis_), is only a concealed shell; and I need\nnot to dissect the animal to acquaint you that it is a highly\ninteresting structure. A deservedly eminent physiologist shall describe\nit for us.\n\n\"The outer shelly portion of this body consists of horny layers,\nalternating with calcified layers, in which last may be seen a hexagonal\narrangement. The soft, friable substance, that occupies the hollow of\nthis boat-shaped shell, is formed of a number of delicate plates,\nrunning across it from one side to the other in parallel directions, but\nseparated by intervals several times wider than the thickness of the\nplates; and these intervals are in great part filled up by what appear\nto be fibres, or slender pillars, passing from one plate or floor to\nanother. A more careful examination shows, however, that instead of a\nlarge number of detached pillars, there exists a comparatively small\nnumber of very thin, sinuous lamin\u00e6, which pass from one surface to the\nother, winding and doubling upon themselves, so that each lamina\noccupies a considerable space. Their precise arrangement is best seen by\nexamining the parallel plates, after the sinuous lamin\u00e6 have been\ndetached from them; the lines of junction being distinctly indicated\nupon these. By this arrangement, each layer is most effectually\nsupported by those with which it is connected above and below; and the\nsinuosity of the thin intervening lamin\u00e6, answering exactly the same\npurpose as the \"corrugation\" given to iron plates for the sake of\ndiminishing their flexibility, adds greatly to the strength of this\ncurious texture, which is at the same time lightened by the large amount\nof space between the parallel plates that intervenes between the\nsinuosities of the lamin\u00e6.\"[79]\n\nNow the delicately thin calcareous plates have all been formed in\nsuccession, \"the first formed being at the outer part and posterior\ntermination of the shell, and the succeeding new layers extending always\nmore forwards than the edges of the old.\"[80] They exhibit then many\nhundreds of distinct deposits, each the result of a separate process,\neach the work of a definite period of time. The \"cuttle-bone\" is an\nautographic record, indubitably genuine, of the Cuttlefish's history.\n\nYes, it is certainly genuine; it is as certainly autographic: but it is\n_not true_. That Cuttle has been this day created.\n\n\n\n\nIX.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Vertebrate Animals._)\n\n     \"The organisation of the body at each epoch may be truly\n     said to be the _resultant_ of all the material changes which\n     it has undergone during the preceding periods.\"--_Dr.\n     Carpenter; Human Physiology_, p. 903.\n\n\nThe _Invertebrata_ then agree in one story, and that story is the same\nas what the plants had told us before. Let us try if the Vertebrate\ncreatures bear them out.\n\nFrom this promontory we can look far down into the clear profundity of\nthe still and smooth sea. What is that large object that plays hither\nand thither yonder, now shooting ahead, now resting on his oars, now\nturning on his course, now cutting the surface, now descending to the\ndepths? It is a full-grown Sword-fish, some ten feet long. We are\nsufficiently near him to discern that he has one short but high dorsal\nfin, near the head, and a minute one close to the caudal, the whole\nintermediate region being smooth. But this is a mark of adult age; for\nin early life this same species is furnished with one long and high\ndorsal, which is continuous from the occiput to the vicinity of the\ntail-fin. The remotely divided dorsal here tells of many years of life;\nbut tells deceitfully, for the Sword-fish is but just created.\n\nHa! the Sword-fish has darted away, like lightning, after a finny\nvictim. See with what doublings and windings he pursues it, and how the\nterrified prey uses all its powers to escape from its gigantic enemy!\nNow they near the shore; and now the frightened quarry has leaped out of\nthe sea upon yonder flat shelf of rock, where it lies gasping and\nfloundering, delivered indeed from its pursuer, but only to die by being\ndrowned _in the air_. We will descend from the cliffs, and look at it.\n\nIt is a Gilt-head (_Chrysophrys aurata_). Life is extinct now; but the\nbrilliant colours and fine metallic reflections are scarcely dimmed--the\nsilvery belly--the azure fins--the sides that gleam like polished steel,\ninlaid with bands of burnished gold!\n\nI will pluck a scale from this brilliant silvery surface. Its hinder, or\nfree edge, is beset with fine flexible crystalline points, arranged in\nmany successive rows, overlapping each other. The front, or attached\nedge, is cut in a scolloped pattern, the extremities of undulations\nthat radiate from a common point behind the centre. The whole surface,\nexcept the hinder portion that is studded with imbricated points, is\ncovered with an immense multitude of fine concentric lines, which follow\nthe form of the general outline. These are marks of successive increase;\nfor every one of the lines is the margin of a lamina, the aggregation of\nwhich makes up the thickness of the scale. The lamin\u00e6 can be separated\nby long maceration in water; and then we see that they are laid one on\nanother in regular order, the uppermost being the smallest, and the\nfirst formed; the last made, which is the largest, being now in contact\nwith the skin.\n\n[Illustration: SCALE OF GILTHEAD.]\n\nEvery scale is therefore a document, on which is indelibly written the\nrecord of a multitude of processes, all effected in the past history of\nthe fish. The successively deposited lamin\u00e6 are exactly analogous to\nthose of calcareous substance in the shell of the bivalve;[81] and the\nevidence is of exactly the same character as what we lately read off\nfrom the valve of the _Dione_. But, just as in that example, too, the\noverruling fact of recent creation precludes our deduction of time from\nthe evidence, since it proves the development to have been prochronic.\n\nI see yonder a more terrific tyrant of the sea than the Sword-fish. It\nis the grisly Shark (_Carcharodon_). How stealthily he glides along,\ncutting the glittering surface of the sea with his dorsal, and now and\nthen protruding just the tip of the upper lobe of his caudal in the wake\nof the other! Let us go and look into his mouth; for neither animals nor\nelements present any impediments to these investigations of ours. Is not\nthis an awful array of knives and lancets? Is not this a case of\nsurgical instruments enough to make you shudder? What would be the\namputation of your leg to this row of triangular scalpels, each an inch\nand a half in diameter? moved, too, by these powerful muscles?\n\nBut observe the arrangement of these most formidable teeth. They are not\nconfined to a single row as ours are, but each is succeeded by another\nlying behind it, that by another, and another, and another,--why, there\nare a dozen ranks of teeth, lying regularly packed one behind the other.\nThe object of this arrangement is a constant supply of new teeth, as\nthose in use become broken off, or wasted by the sloughing away of the\nexterior half-ossified crust of the cartilaginous jaw, to which their\nbase is fastened by ligaments. Only one row, the outer one, is in use at\nonce, and this row stands erect; the others lie flat on each other (more\nand more completely as they recede from the outer row); a reserve of\nweapons in readiness for use, when those now employed are done with.\nThere is a continual growth of the surface to which the teeth are\nfastened, from within outwards; so that each of the reserve rows will in\nturn be brought to the edge of the jaw, when it will be thrown up into\nthe erect position, while the preceding, now turned out of the mouth by\nthe gradual eversion of the surface, sloughs away and disappears as an\nuseless incumbrance. It follows, therefore, that the teeth which we now\nsee erect and threatening, are the successors of former ones that have\npassed away, and that they were once dormant like those we see behind\nthem.\n\nBut perhaps you may say, What evidence is there that these ever had any\npredecessors? that they were not originally the front rank as they are\nnow? A very fair question.\n\nIn the first place, the great size of the tooth indicates maturity; and\nis in keeping with the dimensions of the animal,--some twenty feet or\nso,--which are those of an adult, if not a full-grown individual. But\nadult age implies previous youth and infancy, and a gradual growth from\nthe length of a few inches to this formidable size. The teeth are found\nin the embryo Shark when not more than a foot long; and it is evident\nthat many successive generations of teeth have passed away between those\npristine lancets of a line in diameter, and these of an inch and a half.\n\nBut stay; there is a peculiarity in the structure of these present\nteeth, which surely indicates their place to be far on in the\nsuccession. Each is seen to be finely serrated on its two outer\nedges,--a provision which, of course, makes them more effective dividers\nof flesh and bone. But this structure is not found in the teeth of young\nindividuals, which up to a period comparatively advanced, have simply\ncutting edges.\n\nHence we are compelled by the phenomena to infer a long past existence\nto this animal, which yet has been called into being within an hour.\n\nOn yonder twig sits a beautiful little Tree-frog, which you would be\nready to mistake for a leaf of more than usually emerald hue, but for\nthe glittering eye, and the line of yellow edged with purple that passes\ndown the side. Do you notice the frequent gulpings of the throat? Those\nare the periodic inspirations Of air, by which the creature breathes;\nfor, having no ribs, by means of which to depress, and so to expand, the\nthoracic cavity, the Frog swallows the air by a voluntary action. These\nair-gulps afford us another example of the sort of evidence we are\nsearching for; they are so many proofs of a past history. For the\nTree-frog has not _always_ swallowed air; there was a period in its life\nwhen it had no lungs; when it was an aquatic animal, as exclusively a\nwater-breather as any fish. Fish-like in _form_ it was then, as well as\nin _habit_; it was a tadpole with a long compressed muscular tail, and\nwith external gills of several branches, but as destitute of lungs as it\nwas of limbs. Any physiologist, looking at our little green Tree-frog,\nwould pronounce without hesitation on the stages through which it has\npassed; and would describe with the most perfect confidence the order\nin which they took place; the gradual absorption of the branchi\u00e6, the\ndevelopment of the lungs, the shrinking up and final disappearance of\nthe tail, the budding forth of the tiny rudimentary limbs, the hinder\npair first, then the fore pair, and the subsequent division of their\nextremities into toes;--the metamorphosis of the little fish into a\nlittle batrachian, and the gradual growth and maturation of the\nlatter,--these are facts,--the physiologist would say,--as sure both as\nto their actuality and as to their order, as that the Frog is a Frog.\n\nAh! but the physiologist is not aware of a fact, which invalidates all\nhis conclusions based upon experience,--the fact that the little\nTree-frog has been created but this very instant.\n\nHark! that rattling noise is an admonition to us to tread circumspectly.\nIt is the vibration of the horny caudal appendages of a Rattlesnake. And\nI see the reptile coiled up under yonder shadowing leaf. But our\npresence is a privileged presence, and so we may handle and examine him\nwith impunity. The organ which produces this sound is composed of a\nnumber of hollow horny capsules, each one fitting into the next, in\nwhich it is retained loosely by a protuberance of its surface. These,\nbeing agitated at the will of the animal, produce that sound which we\njust now heard. The capsules are developed periodically, one being added\nto the number already existing every year, until as many as forty are\naccumulated.[82] This individual, therefore, having five-and-twenty\nrattles, must be five-and-twenty years old.\n\nThis Snake, however, has had no past years; it has had no yesterday. Its\nexistence commenced this hour.\n\nHere crouches, among the thick reeds, the Leviathan of the rivers, the\nmailed Crocodile. His body, invested with bony ridged plates, that rise\ninto strong serrations along the tail, seems clothed with power; and his\nlong rows of interlocking teeth, unveiled by lips, appear grinning with\nperpetual rage. An experienced herpetologist would not fail to find\nmany evidences of age in this huge reptile. First of all, he would point\nto its monstrous size; then to the breadth and massive thickness of the\ndermal plates. \"The head,\" he would say, \"in the ruggedness of its\nsurface, shows the same thing, for in youth it was comparatively smooth;\nand also in the form of its outline; for in this example its length is\ndouble its breadth, whereas in youth, these measurements were nearly\nequal. These conical teeth, too, are by no means the same individual\nteeth which existed at first. If you look at the base of one, you will\nsee that it is hollow, and that the sides of this portion are already in\nprocess of absorption; that this hollow cone is a sheath for another\ntooth beneath, which is destined to replace it; as this has itself\nreplaced its predecessor. The large size of the teeth which we see,\ntherefore, which accords with the dimensions of the jaws, is not a\ncondition induced by gradual growth, but by a succession of sloughings\nand replacements; and hence the present teeth, in their size, point\nconclusively to others which have preceded them, but which have\ndisappeared.\"\n\nYet nothing can be more certain, than that, in this Crocodile, which has\nbeen created to-day, the successive teeth thus witnessed to, are but\nideal, that is prochronic, teeth; and that all the other indications of\nthe lapse of time, in the development of this individual, are liable to\nthe same exception.\n\nSee this solemn, slow-going Tortoise, shut up in his high-domed house of\nbones. It is the beautiful _Testudo pardalis_, well named from the\nplates being elegantly spotted and splashed with black on a pale-yellow\nground, like the fur of the panther. This is a rather large individual,\nand the number of concentric lines on the plates of his armour,--or may\nI not rather say the _tiles_ wherewith his house is roofed?--is\ncommensurately great. You see what I mean. Each of the angular plates\nhas a small nuclear lamina, not in the centre of the area, for the\ndevelopment has been one-sided, but on the highest part. This was the\nplate in its earliest form, or at least the earliest of which any trace\nis left; for probably there were others yet earlier and smaller, which,\non account of their thinness, have been rubbed away in the travels of\nthe old wanderer. From this nucleus, the plate has been successively\nenlarged, to correspond with the general growth of the animal, by\nrepeated additions of new lamin\u00e6 to the inferior surface; each new\nlamina being a little wider in every direction than that which preceded\nit, though not _equally_ on all the margins; and thus the plates assumed\nthe form of a very low cone, as you see, always preserving the specific\noutline, and manifesting the stages of increase, by the projecting edges\nof the successive lamin\u00e6, exactly as we saw lately in the scales of the\nfish.\n\n[Illustration: PLATES OF TORTOISE.]\n\nWhether these lamin\u00e6 are increased in an annual ratio, I am not sure,\nnor is it important. There are, I find, about forty-five concentric\nlines on one plate in this specimen, besides others which are\nevanescent. Hence it would be quite legitimate to infer that this\nTortoise has passed through at least forty-five distinct periods of\nlife, each of which has left a legible record of its existence.\n\nAnd yet, this moment, in which we look at it, is the very first moment\nof its life; the concentric layers are evidences of processes that never\noccurred, except prochronically.\n\nSee yonder stately bird, nearly of the height of man, marching among the\nluxuriant musa-groves, and feeding on the succulent fruits. There is\nnothing very admirable in its coarse, black, hair-like plumage; but the\nrich hues of its naked neck, azure, purple, and scarlet, of the most\nvivid intensity, attract the gaze. The most remarkable feature in its\nphysiognomy, is the singular, tall ridge of horn on its head, which,\nlike the crested helmet of some mailed warrior, imparts an air of\nmartial prowess to the bird, little in accordance with its peaceful\nhabits.\n\nThis protuberance is altogether a development of age. The skull, in the\nyouth of the Cassowary, was scarcely more elevated than that of a\nchicken; but in the lapse of years, the bony ridge, encased in horn, has\ngradually elevated itself to the height which it now possesses.\n\nHere again we have a record of time, which is belied by the fact of the\nbird's recent creation.\n\nWhat is the glorious train of the Peacock, all filled with eyes, but a\nfalse witness of the same kind? It leads us to infer that the bird is\nthree years old at least, since before that period, the covert feathers,\nwhich are to form the splendid ornament of maturity, are not developed.\n\nWhat are the lengthened tail-plumes of most refulgent blue, that adorn\nthe Fork-tailed Humming-bird (_Trochilus forficatus_); what the\ngorgeously golden tail of the Resplendent Trogon; what the elegant\nlyre-shaped feathers of the Menura; what the lustrous plumage of the\nBirds of Paradise,--all of which have been but this hour created,--but\nso many testimonies, unworthy of confidence, to a past history?\n\nBut, further, every individual feather of this beautiful array of\nplumage concurs in bearing its unblushing witness to the same untruth.\nWhat says the physiologist, who is able to read off these autographic\nrecords?\n\n[Illustration: GROWTH OF A FEATHER.]\n\n\"A little while ago, the tips of these feathers were seen each\nprotruding from the extremity of a thick, opaque tube; and a little\nwhile before that, the tube itself, was a closed capsule, imbedded in a\ndeep follicle of the skin. If you had then cut open the capsule, you\nwould have found two concentric membranous tubes investing a highly\nvascular secreting pulp, abundantly supplied with nerves and\nblood-vessels through an orifice at the bottom of the capsule, and\ndestined to form the substance of the coming feather. Indeed, you would\nhave seen the soft, newly-formed barbs folded round the central\norganized matrix; and below, the incipient quill, filled with the living\npulp-cells, and their blood-vessels, which were destined subsequently to\nwither up and collapse into the light skinny pith which you see in the\nperfectly matured feather. These are stages which each of these hundreds\nof feathers has passed through; and these are but a single generation,\nwhich have replaced former series that have been lost in the process of\nmoulting, every one of which had in its turn passed through exactly\ncorresponding stages, and so on backward, till we reach the first race\nof feathers, which were already partly developed when the chick burst\nforth from its imprisoning egg-shell.\"\n\nSo says the physiologist; but is he not most egregiously in error, since\nthis is the day of these lovely beings' creation?\n\nThere goes the great Whale, the true Whalebone Whale, rolling and\nwallowing in the trough of the sea, and exposing his enormous black back\nlike an island amidst the white foam, which he stirs up, \"making the\ndeep to be hoary.\" We will use our privilege and take a peep into his\nmouth, as we did just now into that of the Shark.\n\nWhat a cavern! and all bristling with long black hair! Why it seems as\nif the hair grew on the wrong side of his head--on the inside instead of\nthe outside!\n\nNay, what you call hair is really the Whale's teeth, or what represents\nteeth. This is the interior free fibrous margin of the _baleen_, which\ndescends in long triangular plates from the upper jaw. There are about\ntwo hundred plates on each side, set face to face, with an interval\nbetween, and the edges outward. The inward edge runs off into those long\nhair-like filaments, which also extend from the slender tip. And the\nwhole forms an effective sifting apparatus, by which the volume of\nsea-water, which the huge creature takes into his mouth in feeding, is\ndrained of the sea-blubbers, the worms, the mollusks, and other small\nmatters, which constitute the subsistence of this vast body.\n\nNow each of these four hundred plates, some twelve feet in length, has\ngrown from a minute sort of bud, in the upper jaw. Its base is hollow,\nresting on the formative pulp which is developed from the gum. The pulp\nis understood to be the immediate origin of the hairy fringe, while a\ndense vascular substance, seated between the bases of the plates, forms\nthe plate itself. When the plate reaches a certain length, its diameter\nhas become greatly attenuated, and its tip is constantly breaking away,\nleaving the hair projecting. There is therefore a continual\ndisappearance of the substance of the plates at the tips, and a\ncontinual growth at the base to supply the deficiency; and even more, at\nleast during the period of adolescence, because the actual dimensions of\nthe plates have to be increased in the ratio of the growth of the whole\nanimal.\n\nHere, again, we read a record of past history. The Whale is known to be\na long-lived animal; and a period of many years must have passed in\nbringing these plates of baleen to their present maturity. Yet the vast\norganism before us has been created in its vastness but to-day.\n\nOn the most prominent shelf of yonder precipice, a sharp buttress of\nnaked limestone, stands an Ibex, guarding, like a watchful sentinel, the\nherd in the sheltered valley which own his leadership. The pair of noble\nhorns, which are at once his defence and his pride, are marked\nthroughout their ample curve with semi-rings, or knobs, on their\nanterior side. These afford us an infallible criterion of the animal's\nage.\n\nWe can count in this Ibex fourteen of such prominent bosses. Now the\nhorn in these animals is not shed during life, but consists of a\npersistent sheath of horny substance, enveloping a bony core. Until full\nadult age, both the core of bone and the sheath of horn are continually\ngrowing; and in the spring, when there is an unusual augmentation of\nvital energy in the system, the increase is more than usually rapid. At\nthis season, the new matter deposited in the corneous sheath accumulates\nin the form of one of these bosses, each of which is therefore produced\nat the interval of a year. As the first boss appears in the second year\nof the animal's age, we have but to add one to the number of the bosses\non each horn, and we have the number of years which it has lived. The\nIbex before us is just fifteen years old.\n\n[Illustration: HORNS OF STAG;\n\nIn their successive developments.]\n\nYon Stag that is rubbing his branchy honours against a tree in the\nglade,--can we apply the same criterion to him? Not exactly: for the\nhorns of all the Deer-tribe are of a different structure from those of\nthe _Caprad\u00e6_. They are bones of great solidity, not invested with any\ncorneous sheath, but clothed for a certain portion of their duration\nwith a living vascular skin, and are shed every year during life and as\nconstantly renewed.\n\nYet the bony horns of the Stag are no less sure a criterion of age, at\nleast up to a certain period--than are those of the hollow-horned Ibex.\nIn the spring of the second year of the Fawn, the horns first appear,\nseated on bony footstalks that spring from the frontal bone. The skin\nthat covers these knobs begins to swell and to become turgid with blood\nsupplied by enlarging arteries. Layers of bone are now deposited,\nparticle by particle, on the footstalks, with surprising rapidity,\nproducing the budding horns, which grow day by day, still covered by the\nskin, which grows also in a corresponding ratio. This goes on till a\nsimple rod of bone is formed, without any branches. When this is\ncomplete, the course of the arteries that supplied the skin is cut off\nby fresh osseous particles deposited in a thick ring around the base.\nThe enveloping skin then dies, and is soon rubbed off.\n\nAfter a few months, the connexion of the now dead bone with the living\nis dissolved by absorption, and the horns fall off.\n\nThe next spring they are renewed again, but now with a branch or antler;\nand the whole falls again in autumn. Every spring sees them renewed, but\nalways with an increase of development; and this increase is definite\nand well-known; so that the age of a Stag, at least of one in the vigour\nof life, can be readily and certainly stated.\n\nFor example, the individual Stag before us, now browsing so peacefully,\nhas each horn composed of the following elements:--the beam, or main\nstem; two brow-antlers; one stem-antler, and a coronet of four snags, or\nroyal-antlers, at the summit. This condition is peculiar to the seventh\ndevelopment, to which if we add one year for the hornless stage of\nfawnhood, we obtain eight years, as, beyond all doubt, the age of this\nStag.\n\nBoth of these examples, however, the Ibex and the Stag, though so\nconclusive, and seemingly so irrefragable, are rendered nugatory by the\nopposing fact of a just recent creation.\n\nSee this Horse, a newly created, really wild Horse,\n\n     \"Wild as the wild deer, and untaught,\n       With spur and bridle undefiled,\"--\n\nhis sleek coat of a dun mouse-colour, with a black stripe running down\nhis back, and with a full black mane and tail. He has a wild spiteful\nglance; and his eye, and his lips now and then drawn back displaying his\nteeth, indicate no very amiable temper. Still, we want to look at those\nteeth of his. Please to moderate your rancour, generous Dobbin, and let\nus make an inspection of their condition!\n\nNow notice these peculiarities. The third pair of permanent incisors\nhave appeared, and have attained the same level as their fellows; all\nare marked with a central hollow on the crown, the middle pair faintly:\nthe canines have acquired considerable size; they present a\nregularly-convex surface outwardly, without any marks of grooving on the\nsides; their inner side is concave; their edges sharp; the third\npermanent molar has displaced its predecessor of the milk set, and the\nsixth is developed.[83]\n\nThis condition of the teeth infallibly marks the fifth year of the\nHorse's age. A year ago the third incisor was only just rising; the\ncanines were small, and strongly grooved, and the third milk grinder was\nyet existing. A year hence, the central incisors will be worn quite\nflat, and their marks obliterated; the canines will be fully grown\ntusks, the second molar will have reached its full height, and all the\nteeth will be of the same level. We can then with perfect confidence\nassert this to be a five-year old Horse. And yet, if we do so, we shall\nassert a palpable untruth, for the young and vigorous stallion has been\ncreated to-day.\n\n[Illustration: SKULL OF BABIROUSSA.]\n\nIn the thickets of this nutmeg grove beside us there is a Babiroussa;\nlet us examine him. Here he is, almost submerged in this tepid pool.\nGentle swine with the circular tusk, please to open your pretty mouth!\nHere are four incisors in the upper jaw; _at one time there were six_.\nThe canines of the same jaw having pierced through the flesh and skin\nof the face, have grown upward and curved backward like horns; nay, they\nhave nearly completed a circle, and are threatening to re-enter the\nskull; _once these tusks had not broken from the gums_. There are two\npre-molars: _once there were four_. There are three molars, of which the\nfirst is worn quite smooth: _once this surface was crowned with four\ncones; but the third molar had not then appeared_.\n\nAway to a broader river. Here wallows and riots the huge Hippopotamus.\nWhat can we make of his dentition? A strange array of teeth, indeed, is\nhere; as uncouth and hideous a set as you may hope to see. Yes, but the\ngroup is instructive. We will take them in detail.\n\nLook at the lower jaw first. Here are two large projecting incisors in\nthe middle, with their tips worn away obliquely on the outer side, by\nthe action of their opponents in the upper jaw, which are also worn\ninwardly. The outer incisors, both above and below, are also mutually\nworn in like manner. The lower canines form massive tusks, curved in the\narc of a circle, ground away obliquely by the upper pair; which are\nshort and similarly worn on their front edges. There are three\npre-molars on each side, below and above, much worn: once there was a\nfourth, but it was shed early. Lastly, we find three molars, whose\ncrowns are ground down so as to expose two polished areas of a\nfour-lobed figure. A little while ago, these double areas were\ntrilobate, but at first there were no smooth areas at all; for these are\nbut sections, more or less advanced, of the conical knobs, with which\nthe crown of the molar was originally armed.[84]\n\nIn both these examples, the polished surfaces of the teeth, worn away by\nmutual action, afford striking evidence of the lapse of time. Some one\nmay possibly object, however, to this: \"What right have you to assume\nthat these teeth were worn away at the moment of its creation, admitting\nthe animal to have been created adult? May they not have been entire?\" I\nreply, Impossible: the Hippopotamus's teeth would have been perfectly\nuseless to him, except in the ground-down condition: nay, the unworn\ncanines would have effectually prevented his jaws from closing,\nnecessitating the keeping of the mouth wide open until the attrition was\nperformed; long before which, of course, he would have starved. In a\nnatural condition the mutual wearing begins as soon as the surface of\nthe teeth come into contact with each other; that is, as soon as they\nhave acquired a development which constitutes them fit for use. The\ndegree of attrition is merely a question of time. There is no period\nthat can be named, supposing the existence of the perfected teeth at\nall, in which the evidence of this action would not be visible. How\ndistinct an evidence of past action, and yet, in the case of the created\nindividual, how illusory!\n\n[Illustration: SKULL OF HIPPOPOTAMUS.]\n\n     \"Trampling his path through wood and brake,\n     And canes, which, crackling, fall before his way,\n     And tassel-grass, whose silvery feathers play\n           O'ertopping the young trees,--\n       On comes the Elephant, to slake\n     His thirst at noon, in yon pellucid springs.\n     Lo! from his trunk upturn'd, aloft he flings\n       The grateful shower: and now\n       Plucking the broad-leaf'd bough\n     Of yonder plane, with waving motion slow,\n           Fanning the languid air,\n     He waves it to and fro.\"\n\nWe will not be content with admiring the vast size of the fine\nDauntelah, and the majesty of his air and movement, and the intelligence\nmanifested in all the actions of the \"half-reasoning\" beast, as he\nexplores the amoenities of the young world to which he has but this\nmorning been introduced. We are out on another sort of scent: let us try\nif we can glean any light from him on our present question.\n\nAnd, first, we cannot fail to notice his fine pair of tusks curving\nupwards almost to a semicircle. Each tusk is composed of a vast number\nof thin cones of ivory, superimposed one on another; ever increasing by\nnew ones formed within the interior at the base, and moulded upon the\nvascular pulp which fills the cavity, and by which the solid ivory is\nconstantly secreted and deposited. Each new cone pushes further and\nfurther out those previously deposited, and thus the tusk ever grows in\nlength as it increases in age.\n\n[Illustration: SKULL OF ELEPHANT.]\n\nHow many years have these tusks occupied in attaining their present\ndiameter and length? We cannot tell: without a transverse section we\ncannot determine the number of layers of which each consists: and if we\ncould, we should yet require to know what ratio exists between the\ndeposition of a cone of ivory and a fixed period of time. The cones,\nhowever, in a tusk of these dimensions, are very numerous, for they are\nbut thin; and it is enough for our purpose that they have occupied the\nsame number of periods of time for their formation, though we cannot\nprecisely indicate the length of these periods.\n\nLeaving the tusks, which are the upper incisors, let us now examine the\nmolars. And there is in these a remarkable peculiarity of development,\nwhich will assist us greatly in our chronic inquiries. Before we look at\nthem it may be as well to consider this peculiarity.\n\nThe Elephant has, from first to last, six, or perhaps eight, molars on\neach side of each jaw; but there are never more than two partially, or\none wholly, in use at once. They have originally an uneven surface,\nproduced by the extremities of a number of what may be considered as so\nmany finger-like constituent teeth, arranged in transverse rows, covered\nby hard enamel, and cemented together by a bony substance. These points\nare gradually worn down by the process of mastication, and then the\ncompound tooth appears crossed by narrow cartouches, or long ovals of\nenamel, indented at their margins.\n\n\"The first set of molars, [_i. e._ the first compound molar] or milk\nteeth, begins to cut the jaw eight or ten days after birth, and the\ngrinders of the upper jaw appear before those of the lower one. These\nmilk-grinders are not shed, but are gradually worn away during the time\nthe second set are coming forward; and as soon as the body of the\ngrinder is nearly worn away, the fangs begin to be absorbed. From the\nend of the second to the beginning of the sixth year, the third set come\ngradually forward as the jaw lengthens, not only to fill up this\nadditional space, but also to supply the place of this second set, which\nare, during the same period, gradually worn away, and have their fangs\nabsorbed. From the beginning of the sixth to the end of the ninth year,\nthe fourth set of grinders come forward to supply the gradual waste of\nthe third set. In this manner to the end of life, the Elephant obtains a\nset of new teeth, as the old ones become unfit for the mastication of\nits food.\n\n\"The milk-grinders consist each of four teeth, or _lamin\u00e6_; the second\nset of grinders of eight or nine _lamin\u00e6_; the third set of twelve or\nthirteen; the fourth set of fifteen, and so on to the seventh or eighth\nset, when each grinder consists of twenty-two or twenty-three: and it\nmay be added, that each succeeding grinder takes at least a year more\nthan its predecessor to be completed.\"[85]\n\nAs each tooth advances, only a small portion pierces the gum at once;\none of twelve or fourteen _lamin\u00e6_, for instance, shows only two or\nthree of these through the gum, the remainder being as yet imbedded in\nthe jaw; and in fact the _tooth is complete at its fore part_, where it\nis required for mastication, _while behind it is still very incomplete_;\nthe lamin\u00e6 are successively perfected as they advance. The molar of an\nElephant _can never, therefore, be seen in a perfect state_: for if it\nis not worn in front, the back part is not fully formed and is without\nfangs; and when the structure of the hinder portion is perfected, _the\nfront part is already gone_.\n\n\"When the complex molar cuts the gum, the cement is first rubbed off the\ndigital summits; then their enamel cap is worn away, and the central\ndentine comes into play with a prominent enamel ring; the digital\nprocesses are next ground down to their common uniting base, and a\ntransverse tract of dentine, with its wavy border of enamel, is\nexposed; finally, the transverse plates themselves are abraded to their\ncommon base of dentine, and a smooth and polished tract of that\nsubstance is produced. From this basis the roots of the molar are\ndeveloped, and increase in length, to keep the worn crown on the\ngrinding level, until the reproductive force is exhausted. When the\nwhole extent of a grinder has thus successively come into play, its last\npart is reduced to a long fang supporting a smooth and polished field of\ndentine, with sometimes a few remnants of the bottom of the enamel folds\nat its hinder part. Then, having become useless, it is attacked by the\nabsorbent action, by which, and the pressure of the succeeding tooth, it\nis finally shed.\"[86]\n\nWith these physiological facts ascertained, let us proceed to the\ndetermination of the actual age of our noble Dauntelah. The molar in\npresent use has a length of about nine inches, and a diameter of three\nand a half. Its crown is crossed by about eighteen enamel-plates; of\nwhich the anterior ones are much worn away, while the hinder ones can\nscarcely be counted with precision, as they have not wholly cut their\nway through the gum. These characters indicate the fifth molar (or set\nof molars) of the whole life-series. And the following facts will help\nus now to fix the actual age, at least approximately.\n\nThe first molar cuts the gum at two weeks old, is in full use at three\nmonths, and is shed in the course of the second year. The second cuts\nthe gum at about six months, and is shed in the fifth year. The third\nappears at two years, is in full use about the fifth year, and finally\ndisappears about the ninth year. In the sixth year the fourth breaks\nfrom the gum, and lasts till the animal's twenty-fifth year. The fifth\ncuts the gum at the twentieth year, is entirely exposed soon after the\nfortieth, and is thrust out about the sixtieth year, by the advance of\nthe sixth molar, which appears at about fifty years old, and probably\nlasts for half a century more. If others succeed this,--a seventh and\neven an eighth, as some assert,--these would carry on the Elephant's\nlife to two or three centuries, in accordance with an ancient opinion,\nwhich is in some degree countenanced by modern observations.\n\nTo come back, then, to the case before us, since the fifth molar has its\nfore part much worn, and the posterior lamin\u00e6 scarcely yet protruded\nfrom the gum, it follows that this Elephant is now not far from the\nfortieth year of his life, a deduction which well agrees with the\ndimensions of his tusks, and his appearance of mature vigour.\n\nCan you detect a flaw in this reasoning? And yet how baseless the\nconclusion, which assigns a past existence of forty years to a creature\ncalled into existence this very day.\n\n\n\n\n\nX.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Man._)\n\n     \"Once, in the flight of ages past,\n       There lived a Man,--and who was he?\n     Mortal, howe'er thy lot be cast,\n       That man resembled thee.\"--MONTGOMERY.\n\n\nWe have knocked at the doors of the vegetable world, asking our\nquestions; then at those of the lower tribes of the brute creation, and\nnow at those of the higher forms; and we have received but one\nanswer,--varying, indeed, in terms, but essentially the same in\nmeaning,--from all. And now we have one more application to make; we\nhave, still in our ideal peregrination, to seek out the newly-created\nform of our first progenitor, the primal Head of the Human Race.\n\nAnd here we behold him; not like the beasts that perish, but--\n\n       \"Of far nobler shape, erect and tall,\n     Godlike erect, with native honour clad,\n     In naked majesty, as lord of all.\"\n\nThe definitive question before us is this: Does the body of the Man just\ncreated present us with any evidences of a past existence, and if so,\nwhat are they? And that we may rightly judge of the matter, we will, as\non former occasions, call in the aid of a skilful and experienced\nphysiologist, to whom we will distinctly put the question.\n\n\n_The Physiologist's Report._\n\nIn replying to your inquiry concerning the proofs of a past existence in\nthe Man before me, I must treat of him as a mere animal,--a creature\nhaving an organic being.\n\nAnd, first, I find every part of the surface of his body possessing a\nnearly uniform temperature, which is higher than that of the surrounding\natmosphere. There is, moreover, on all parts of the body, a tinge of\nredness, more or less vivid in certain regions. The heat, and the\ncarnation tinge, alike indicate the presence of blood, arterial blood,\ndiffused throughout, and, in particular, occupying the capillaries of\nthe superficial parts. Every drop of this blood is preceded and\nsucceeded by other drops, every one of which has been impelled out of\nthe heart by its constant contractions.\n\nBut the very existence of this blood supposes the pre-existence of chyle\nand lymph, out of which it has been constructed. The chyle was formed\nout of chyme, changed by the action of the pancreatic and biliary\nsecretions. Chyme is food, chemically altered by the action of the\ngastric juice. So that the blood, now coursing through the arteries and\nveins, implies the previous process of the reception of food. And these\npancreatic and biliary secretions, which are essential to the conversion\nof chyme into chyle,--and therefore into blood,--do you ask their\norigin? They were prepared, the one by the pancreas, the other by the\nliver, from blood already existing,--blood _previously formed_ of chyle\nwith the addition of bile, &c.--and so indefinitely.\n\nAgain, the blood in these capillary arteries is of a bright scarlet hue,\nwhich it derives from its being charged with oxygen. This it received in\nthe _lungs_, parting at the same time with the carbon which it had taken\nup in its former course. The lungs then must have existed _before_ the\nblood could be where and what it is, viz. arterial blood in the\ncapillaries of the extremities; before it was driven out of the heart,\nsince it was transmitted from the lungs through the pulmonary veins\ninto the heart, thence to be pumped into the arterial system.\n\nBut since all the tissues of the body are formed from the blood, the\nlungs were dependent on already-existing blood for their existence. And\nas the formative and nutrient power is lodged exclusively in _arterial_\nblood, the very blood out of which the lungs were organized was\ndependent on lungs for oxygenation, without which it would have been\neffete and useless.\n\nHere then is a cycle of which I cannot trace the beginning.\n\nBut further. On the extremities of the fingers and of the toes, there\nare broad horny _nails_. These I trace down to the curved line where\nthey issue from beneath the skin, and whence every particle of each nail\nhas issued in succession. They are composed of several strata of\npolygonal cells, which have all grown in reduplications of the skin,\nforming compressed curved sheaths (_follicles_); stratum after stratum\nof cells having been added to the base-line, as the nail perpetually\ngrew forwards. About three months elapse from the emergence of a given\nstratum of cells, before that stratum becomes terminal; and therefore\neach of these twenty-four finger- and toe-nails is a witness to three\nmonths' past existence.\n\n[Illustration: GROWTH OF HAIR (_magnified_).]\n\nThe head is clothed with luxuriant _hair_, composed of a multitude of\nindividual fibres, each of which is an epidermic appendage, essentially\nsimilar to the nails. Every hair is contained at its basal extremity in\na delicate follicle, where it terminates around a soft vascular bulb,\nmade up of blood-vessels and nerves. On the surface of this living bulb\nthe horny substance is continually secreted and deposited in layers,\neach of which in succession pushes forward those previously made, till\nthe tip extrudes from the follicle of the skin, after which it continues\nto grow in the same way, as an external hair. The tip is gradually worn\naway; and thus the constant growth cannot, in general, cause it to\nexceed a certain given length. Each of the thousands of hairs with which\nthis majestic head is clothed, bears witness to past time; and as the\nincrease of hair is about an inch per month, and as this hair is about\nfour inches in length, we have here thousands of witnesses to at least\nfour months of previous history.\n\nThe bones which make up the firm and stately fabric about which this\nhuman body is built, are no productions of a day. Long before this they\nexisted in the form of cartilages. In these, minute arteries began to\ndeposit particles of phosphate of lime, around certain centres of\nossification, doing their work in a determinate order, and in regular\nlines, so as to form continuous fibres. These fibres, aggregated, and\nconnected by others, soon formed a texture of spicula or thin plates.\n\nNow take as an example a cylindrical hollow bone, as that of the thigh.\nHere the spicula were arranged longitudinally, parallel to the axis of\nthe bone: preserving the general form of the cartilage which constituted\nits scaffolding.\n\nBut the bone required a progressive increase in size. In its early\nstate, moreover, it was not hollow, but solid. Changes must have taken\nplace to bring it to its present dimensions and condition. These were\neffected by the actual removal of some parts, simultaneously with the\ndeposition of others.\n\nAt a certain stage of ossification, cells were excavated by the action\nof the absorbent vessels, which carried away portions of bony matter\nlying in the axis of the cylindrical bone. Their place was supplied by\nan oily matter, which is the marrow. As the growth proceeded, while new\nlayers were deposited on the outside of the bone, and at the end of the\nlong fibres, the internal layers near the centre were removed by the\nabsorbent vessels, so that the cavity was further enlarged. In this\nmanner the outermost layer of the young bone gradually changed its\nrelative situation, becoming more and more deeply buried by the new\nlayers which were successively deposited, and which covered and\nsurrounded it; until by the removal of all the layers situated near to\nthe centre, it became the innermost layer, and was itself destined in\nits turn to disappear, leaving the new bone without a single particle\nwhich had entered into the composition of the original structure.[87]\n\nThese processes have been the slow and gradual work of years, of the\nlapse of which years the bones are themselves eloquent witnesses.\n\nWithin the mouth there are many _teeth_. I will not now speak of their\nexact number, nor of some other particulars concerning them, because I\nmean to return to them presently; but I look only at their general\nstructure and origin. Each tooth consists of three distinct parts, the\ncentral portion, which is _ivory_; the exceedingly hard, polished,\nglassy coat of the crown, which is _enamel_; and a thin layer of bone\naround the fang, which is the _cement_.\n\nBefore either of these appeared, a minute papillary process of vascular\npulp was formed in a cavity of the jaw. Over the pulp was spread an\nexcessively thin membrane, which secreted from the blood, and deposited,\na thin shell of bony matter, or ivory, moulded on the form of the pulp.\nSuccessive layers of ivory were then added, from within; the pulp\ndiminishing in a corresponding ratio. The cavity of the jaw at the same\ntime deepened, and the pulp lengthened downward into the space thus\nprovided; layers of bony substance being gradually deposited upon it, as\nabove.\n\n[Illustration: SECTION OF HUMAN TOOTH (_magnified_).]\n\nThe cavity itself was lined with a thick vascular membrane, united to\nthe papilla at its base. Within the space lying between this membrane\nand the pulp, there was deposited from the wall of the former a soft,\ngranular, non-vascular substance, known as the enamel organ. The cells\non the inner surface of this substance then took the form of long,\nsub-parallel prisms, set in close array, perpendicular to the surface of\nthe tooth. Earthy matter was progressively deposited in them, by which\nthey became the exceedingly dense and hard enamel of the crown. The\ncement of the fang was then formed by a slight modification of the\nprocess which had produced the enamel.\n\nHere, then, are several distinct and important processes, effected in\nregular and immutable succession, each requiring time for its\nperformance, and all undeniably witnessed-to by the structure of every\ntooth here seen.\n\nAs I have thus proved the _fact_ of life existing in this human body for\nsome time previous to the present moment, I now proceed to inquire how\nfar its structure may throw light on the _actual duration_ of that past\nlife. How far can we ascertain its chronology?\n\nThe stature of the Man before me is about six feet. An infant at birth\nis from eighteen to twenty-one inches in length. At ten years old the\naverage stature is about four feet. Six feet may be taken as the full\nadult height of man; and this is attained from the twenty-first to the\ntwenty-fifth year. The stature of this individual would therefore\nindicate an age not less than twenty-one years.\n\nOn the front of the throat I perceive a strongly-marked, angular\nprominence, formed by the union of the two plates of the thyroid\ncartilage. The prominence of this angle is due to the enlargement of the\nlarynx; and it is accompanied by a deepening of the pitch of the voice,\nproducing the full rich sounds that we have this instant heard, as the\nMan chanted his song of praise. These tones, and this projection of the\nthyroid cartilage, are equally distinctive marks of puberty, and do not\nappear till about the sixteenth or seventeenth year.\n\nThe chin, and sides of the face, are clothed with a dense bush of crisp\nhair,--the beard. This is a distinctive mark of the adolescent period,\nand may be taken as indicating an age not less than twenty years.\n\nOn again examining the mouth, I find the teeth are thirty-two in\nnumber; viz., four incisors, two canines, four pre-molars, and six true\nmolars, in each jaw. None of these existed (at least visibly) during the\nfirst seven years of life; in that period they were represented by the\nmilk-teeth of infancy. The appearance of the middle pair of incisors\noccurred at about the eighth year; the lateral incisors at nine; the\nfirst pre-molars at ten; the second at eleven; the canines at about\ntwelve; the second molars at thirteen or fourteen; and the third molars,\nor _dentes sapienti\u00e6_, at about seventeen or eighteen.\n\nThe state of the dentition, then, points to an age certainly not less\nthan the period just named. How much more it may be, we must gather from\nother sources.\n\nI come now to certain phenomena which are not appreciable to us on mere\nexternal examination; but which I am able with certainty to predicate.\nAnd the first of these is the proportion of arterial to venous blood in\nthe capillaries. In infancy, the arterial capillaries contain far more\nblood than the capillary veins; in old age, the proportion is exactly\nreversed; whereas, in maturity, the ratio is just equal. Now, here there\nis a very small preponderance of arterial blood, indicating a period\nbut slightly remote from maturity on the side of youth; well agreeing\nwith the conclusion arrived at from previous premises, of some twenty to\nfive-and-twenty years.\n\nOther and more marked manifestations occur in the condition of the\nskeleton. In the spine, I find _the spinous and transverse processes_ of\nthe several vertebr\u00e6 are completed by separate _epiphyses_, the\nossification of which does not commence till after puberty, and the\nfinal union of which with the body of the bone does not occur till about\nthe age of twenty-five years.\n\nEach _vertebra_, moreover, has attained a smooth annular _plate_ of\nsolid bone, covering a surface that was previously rough and fissured,\nwhich is invariably added at the same period.\n\nThe _ossification of the sacrum_ also has reached its culminating point.\nAt the age of puberty, the component vertebr\u00e6 began to unite from below\nupwards, and the two highest have now coalesced; which also marks a\nperiod of life not earlier than the twenty-fifth year. The whole united\nmass, moreover, is furnished on each side with thin bony plates, the\nappearance of which is no less characteristic of the same age.\n\nEach of the _ribs_ is here furnished with two _epiphyses_, one for the\nhead and the other for the tubercle; the ossification of these began\nsoon after puberty; but their union with the body of the bone, as\npresented here, has taken several years to accomplish.\n\nTo come to the limbs, we find the _shoulder-blade_ presenting three\n_epiphyses_, one for the _coracoid_ process, one for the _acromion_, and\none for the lower angle of the bone, the ossification of which begins\nsoon after puberty, their union with the body of the bone taking place\nbetween the ages of twenty-two and twenty-five years. The _clavicle_ has\nan _epiphysis_ at its sternal end, which begins to form between the\neighteenth and twentieth years, and is united to the rest of the bone a\nfew years later. The consolidation of the shoulder-bone (_humerus_) is\ncompleted rather earlier; the large piece at the upper end, which is\nformed by the coalescence of the ossific centres of the head and two\ntuberosities, unites with the shaft at about the twentieth year; whilst\nits lower extremity is completed by the junction of the external\ncondyle, and of the two parts of the articulating surface (previously\nunited with each other), at about the seventeenth year, and by that of\nthe internal condyle in the year following. The superior _epiphyses_ of\nthe arm-bones (_radius_ and _ulna_) unite with their respective shafts\nat about the age of puberty; the inferior, which are of larger size, at\nabout the twentieth year. The _epiphyses_ of the _metacarpal_ and\n_phalangeal bones_ (those of the hand and fingers) are united to their\nprincipals at about the twentieth year. In the _Lower Extremities_, the\nprocess of ossification is completed at nearly the same periods as that\nof the corresponding parts of the Upper. The consolidation of the\nhipbones (_ilium_, _ischium_, and _pubis_) to form the _os innominatum_,\nby the ossification of the triradiate cartilage that intervenes between\nthem in the socket of the thigh (_acetabulum_), does not take place\nuntil after the period of puberty; and at this time additional\n_epiphyses_ begin to make their appearance on the crest of the _ilium_,\non its anterior inferior spine, on the tuberosity of the _ischium_, and\non the inner margin of the _pubes_, which are not finally joined to the\nbone until about the twenty-fifth year.[88]\n\nThe concurrence of these conditions in the skeleton, the nearly balanced\nratio of the bloods, the perfected dentition, the beard, the deepened\nvoice, the prominent larynx, and the stature, combine to point out,\nwith infallible precision, the age of this Man, as between twenty-five\nand thirty years.\n\nSo far, then, we can with certainty trace back the history of this\nbeing, as an independent organism; but did his history then commence? O\nno; we can carry him much farther back than this. What means this\ncurious depression in the centre of the abdomen, and the corrugated knob\nwhich occupies the cavity?[89]\n\nThis is the NAVEL. The corrugation is the cicatrice left where once was\nattached the umbilical cord, and whence its remains, having died,\nsloughed away. This organ introduces us to the foetal life of Man;\nfor it was the link of connexion between, the unborn infant and the\nparent; the channel, through whose arteries and veins the oxygenated and\nthe effete blood passed to and from the parental system, when as yet the\nunused lungs had not received one breath of vital air.\n\nAnd thus the life of the individual Man before us passes, by a necessary\nretrogression, back to the life of another individual, from whose\nsubstance his own substance was formed by gemmation; one of the\ncomponent cells of whose structure was the primordial cell, from which\nhave been developed successively all the cells which now make up his\nmature and perfect organism.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nHow is it possible to avoid this conclusion? Has not the physiologist\nirrefragable grounds for it, founded on universal experience? Has not\nobservation abundantly shown, that, wherever the bones, flesh, blood,\nteeth, nails, hair of man exist, the aggregate body has passed through\nstages exactly correspondent to those alluded to above, and has\noriginated in the uterus of a mother, its foetal life being, so to\nspeak, a budding out of hers? Has the combined experience of mankind\never seen a solitary exception to this law? How, then, can we refuse the\nconcession that, in the individual before us, in whom we find all the\nphenomena that we are accustomed to associate with adult Man, repeated\nin the most exact verisimilitude, without a single flaw--how, I say, can\nwe hesitate to assert that such was his origin too?\n\nAnd yet, in order to assert it, we must be prepared to adopt the old\nPagan doctrine of the eternity of matter; _ex nihilo nihil fit_. But\nthose with whom I argue are precluded from this, by my first Postulate.\n\n\n\n\n\nXI.\n\nPARALLELS AND PRECEDENTS.\n\n(_Germs._)\n\n     \"Every cell, like every individual Plant or Animal, is the\n     product of a previous organism of the same kind.\"--(DR.\n     CARPENTER, _Comp. Physiol._ \u00a7 347.)\n\n\nIn the preceding examples I have assumed that every organic entity was\ncreated in that stage of its being which constitutes the acme of its\npeculiar development; when all its faculties are in their highest\nperfection, and when it is best fitted to reproduce its own image. From\nthe very nature of things I judge that this was the actual fact;[90]\nsince, if we suppose the formation of the primitive creatures in an\nundeveloped or infant condition, a period would require to lapse before\nthe increase of the species could begin; which time would be wasted. To\nthose, indeed, who receive as authority the testimony of the Holy\nScripture, the matter stands on more than probable ground; for its\nstatements, as to the condition of the things created, are clear and\nfull: they were not seeds, and germs, and eggs, and embryos,--but \"the\ntree yielding fruit whose seed was in itself,\"--\"great whales,\"--\"winged\nfowl,\"--\"the beast of the earth,\"--and \"man.\"[91]\n\nBut I do not mean to shield myself behind authority. I have begged the\n_fact_ of creation; but not the truth, nor even the existence, of any\nhistoric document describing it. It is essential to my argument that any\nsuch be left entirely out of the question; and, for the present, I\naccordingly ignore the Bible.\n\nIt is possible that some opponent may object to my assumption of\nmaturity in created organisms.\n\n\"Your deductions may be sound enough,\" such an one may say, \"provided\nyour newly-created Locust-tree had so many concentric cylinders of\ntimber, your Tree-fern had a well-developed stem of leaf-bases, your\nCoral a great aggregation of polype-cells, your Tortoise a carapace of\nmany-laminated plates, your Elephant a half-worn set of molars, and your\nMan a thoroughly ossified skeleton. But how do you know that either of\nthese organisms was created in this mature stage? I will not deny that\neach was created,--was called suddenly out of non-entity into entity;\nbut I believe, or at least I choose to believe,--that each was created\nin the simplest form in which it can exist; as the seed, the gemmule,\nthe ovum, the--ahem!\"\n\nPray go on! you were about to say \"the infant,\" or \"the foetus,\" or\n\"the embryo,\" probably; pray make your selection: which will you say?\n\n\"Well, I hardly know. Because, if I choose the new-born infant, you will\nsay, Its condition implies a nine months' pre-existence, certainly; not\nto speak of the absurdity of a new-born infant being cast out into an\nopen world without a parent to feed it. If I say, The foetus, or the\nstill more incipient embryo, I involve, at once, a pre-existent mother.\nI am afraid you have me there!\"\n\nI think I have. However, let us take up the matter orderly, and proceed\non the supposition that my previous examples must be all cancelled, and\nthe question argued _de novo_, on the assumption that each organism was\ncreated in its least developed condition.\n\nIt will not be considered necessary, I suppose, to look at any\nintermediate condition of the organisms. The argument which is based\nupon the leaf-scales of the Fern or the Palm would essentially apply to\neither of these plants when it first issues from the ground. At the\nperiod when it comprises but a single frond, the botanist would no more\nhesitate in pronouncing that the organism had passed through stages\nprevious to that one, than he would when it possesses an elongated\nstipe; though, in the latter case, the evidences of the pre-existence\nare more patent to the uninstructed eye. He would say, The single frond\nimplies, with absolute necessity, a spore in the one case, a seed in the\nother; and we need not to see either, to be assured that this must have\npreceded the leaf-stage.\n\nBut you go farther back still. \"The plant was created as a seed.\" Let us\nrenew our imaginary tour at the epoch, or epochs (as many as you\nplease), of creation, on this supposition.\n\nHere is a very young plant of the curious Seychelles Palm or Double\nCocoa-nut (_Lodoicea Sechellarum_). A single frond is all that is yet\ndeveloped, and this is as yet unexpanded, the pinn\u00e6 being still folded\non the midrib, like a fan. Trace the frond down to its base. It springs\nfrom a thick horizontal cylindric process, which has also shot down a\nradicle into the soil. We trace the cylindrical stem along the surface\nof the soil, and find, lying on the ground, among the grass, but not\nburied, a great double nut, something like the two hemispheres of a\nhuman brain, or like a common cocoa-nut, half split open and healed. Out\nof this the thick stem has issued; and we find that it is only the\ncotyledon of the seed, that has prolonged its base in the process of\ngermination, in order to throw up, clear of the nut, the plumule and\nradicle.\n\nWe look at the great nut, and find, on the woody exterior of the fibrous\npericarp, at the side opposite to that whence issues the cotyledon, a\nbroad scar. What is this? It is the _mark left by the severance of a\nfootstalk_, which united the fruit to the parent plant. This great drupe\nwas once a small ovary seated in the centre of a three-petaled flower,\nwhich, with many others, issued out of a great spathe, a mass of\ninflorescence, and hung down from the base of the leafy coronal of an\nadult palm-tree. This scar is an irreproachable witness of the existence\nof the parent palm.\n\nHere, lying on the dry and dusty earth, is a brown flat bean of great\nhardness. This is a seed destined by and by to produce that splendid\ntree _Erythrina crista-galli_. But it has been just created.\n\nThis bean bears on one of its edges an oval scar, very distinctly\nmarked, called the _hilum_. This was the point of attachment of a short\ncolumn, by which the seed was united to one of the sutures of a long\npod, in the interior of which it lay, in company with several others\nlike itself. This great legume or pod had been the bottom of the pistil\nof a papilionaceous flower, crowned by a tiny stigma, lodged in a sheath\nformed by the united stamens, and surrounded by a corolla of refulgent\nscarlet petals.\n\nOf course such a flower was not an independent organism; it was one of\nmany that adorned a great tree, the history of whose life would carry us\nback through several generations of human years.\n\n[Illustration: GARDEN TULIP.\n\nFig. 1. A flower with two petals removed, to show the ovary, _a_. Fig.\n2. The same ovary, more mature, divided longitudinally; _b_, the unripe\nseeds, packed on each other; _c_, a portion of the same carpel, from\nwhich the seeds have been removed.]\n\nThis single infolding leaf, that is just shooting from the soil, so\nsmall and feeble,--what of this? There are certainly no concentric\ncylinders of timber here: can we trace a previous history of this?\n\nYes: by carefully removing the soil from the base, we see that it\noriginates in a flat yellow seed--the seed of a Tulip. Here again we\nhave no difficulty in detecting evidence of its former attachment. A\ngreat number of these seeds were once closely packed one on another, in\neach of the three carpels that constituted the capsule. And this capsule\nhad been the oblong, three-sided ovary, which formed the body of the\npistil in some beautiful Tulip.\n\nDo you observe these two round fleshy leaves, just peeping from the\nsandy earth? They are the earliest growths of a plant of _Arachis\nhypog\u00e6a_. In this case again, to understand the true relations of this\norganism, we must expose it wholly to view.\n\nBeneath the surface of the earth, then, I find that these seed-leaves\nare the two halves (_cotyledons_) of a kind of pea, which was formerly\nenclosed in a wrinkled skinny pod. But what is most interesting is that\nthe pod is here, the cotyledons shooting out of it. And, attached to\none end of the pod, here is a slender stalk, now withered and dry, which\nprojects out of the ground into the air.\n\n[Illustration: GERMINATION OF EARTH-PEA.]\n\nNow here we have a beautiful link of connexion with the past. The plant\nbefore us does not ripen its seeds, and then drop them to care for\nthemselves, as most plants do. \"The young fruit, instead of being placed\nat the bottom of the calyx, as in other kinds of pulse, is found at the\nbottom and in the inside of a long slender tube, which looks like a\nflower-stalk. When the flower has withered, and the young fruit is\nfertilized, nothing but the bottom of the tube with its contents\nremains. At this period a small point projects from the summit of the\nyoung fruit, and gradually elongates, curving downwards towards the\nearth. At the same time the stalk of the fruit lengthens, until the\nsmall point strikes the earth, into which the now half-grown fruit is\nspeedily forced, and where it finally ripens in what would seem a most\nunnatural position.\"[92]\n\nThe young plant before us has been this moment created, and created in\nthis incipient stage of growth: and yet there is, even here, an\nindubitable evidence, so far as physical phenomena can afford it, of a\npast history. It would be utterly impossible to select any stage in the\nlife of the Earth-pea, which did not connect itself, visibly and\npalpably, with a previous stage.\n\nLet us return to the shore-loving Mangrove. You object to my assumption\nthat it was created as a tree, with a well-branched stem elevated upon\na series of arching roots; and to my deduction of pre-lapsed years for\nthe formation of those roots. Very well. I give it up. You allow that\nthe primitive Mangrove was created in some stage, but you contend for\nthe germ-stage, the simplest condition of the plant, whatever that might\nbe.\n\nNow, where shall we find it? In the first pair of developed leaves? They\ncertainly point back to the cotyledons. To the cotyledons, then, let us\nlook.\n\nLo! the young plant is germinating before its connexion with the parent\nis severed. It is the singular habit of this tree, that its seeds are\nalready in a growing condition, while they hang from the twig. Each seed\nis a long club-shaped body, with a bulbous base and a slender point,\nmore or less produced. While it yet hangs from the branch, the radicle\nand crown of the root begin to grow, and gradually lengthen, until the\ntip reaches the soil, which it penetrates and thus roots itself; while\nthose which depend from the higher branches, after growing for a while,\ndrop, and, sticking in the mud, throw out roots from one end, and leaves\nfrom the other.\n\n[Illustration: SEED OF MANGROVE.]\n\nWhat have you gained, then, in this case, by going back to the germ? The\ngerm as decisively asserts its origination from an already existing\norganism--the parent tree--as the flourishing tree witnesses its gradual\ndevelopment from a germ. The Mangrove could not by possibility have been\ncreated in any stage, consistent with the identity of the species with\nthat which we behold now in the nineteenth century,--that did not show\nocular evidence of a previous history;--evidence from the nature of\nthings fallacious.\n\nIt would be merely tiresome to go on through the vegetable kingdom. In\nevery plant the simplest condition--viz. that of a spore or\nseed--depends on some development, or process, or series of processes,\nthat have preceded it. Nor does the lapse of time between the previous\nprocess and the apparent result at all destroy their necessary\nconnexion. In the case of the curious Misseltoes, the ovule does not\nappear till three months after the pollen has been shed; but when it\ndoes appear, its existence as an organism capable of developing the\ncharacteristic form of its species, is as truly dependent on the\nprevious existence of the pollen, as if not an hour had intervened.\n\nSupposing the essential conditions of vegetable organisms to have been\nat the first what they are now; in other words, supposing specific\nidentity to have been always maintained,--which I have demanded as a\npostulate for this argument,--it appears to me demonstrable, that every\nplant in the world presented at the moment of its creation evidences\n_prochronic_ development, in nowise to be distinguished from those on\nwhich we firmly rely as proving the lapse of time.\n\nBut is the case otherwise in the animal world?\n\nWe traced back the history of our Medusa through its marvellous series\nof gemmative developments, till we reached the minute Infusory-like\ngemmule, which is its simplest form. Now it is quite legitimate to\nassume that _this_, and not the pulmonigrade umbrelliform stage, was the\none in which the new-created Medusa began existence. Have we, then, got\nrid of the evidence of past time, which we deduced from the successive\nchanges through which the adult had passed? What is this ciliated\nplanule, and whence comes it? It is the embryo discharged from the\nfringed ovary of a female Medusa; it has already passed through several\nchanges of colour and form. It is now of a deep yellow colour; it has\nbeen violet; it has been colourless: it is now shaped like a dumb-bell;\nit was a globule; it had been a mulberry-mass. Yet earlier, it had been\na component cell of the ovarian band, which divided the generative\ncavity from that of the stomach, in the parent Medusa.\n\nIn like manner the ciliated gemmule from which was formed the \"pluteus\"\nof the Urchin, was dependent on the existence of a parent Urchin; the\nmonadiform germ from which was developed the pentacrinus of the\nFeather-star, was originally hidden in the ovarian tubes of a parent\nFeather-Star: the infant _Serpula_ that deposited the first atoms of\ncalcareous matter as a commenced tube, had begun its own existence in\nthe body of a parent _Serpula_.\n\nIt is true the evidence of the connexion between the germ and the\nparent is not in these low forms always patent to the eye; it is\nphysiological. But it is not less conclusive to one who is able to\nappreciate its force. A physiologist is as sure that every germ, every\novum, in the Invertebrate animals, was produced by an animal of a former\ngeneration, as he is of the same fact in a Mammal, where his eye can see\nthe scar of the umbilical cord.\n\nIn many instances there is stronger, or rather more obvious and\nordinarily appreciable, evidence of the link between the present and the\npast generation, than the physiological dependence. The world of\nInsects, which, from its immensity, and from the high organic rank of\nits members, affords us so exhaustless a mine of economical wonders,--is\nrich in examples to the point. A few of these I shall cite.\n\nThe eggs of many Insects are not dropped anywhere, at random; for, as\nthe newly-born young have limited powers of locomotion, and yet are in\ngeneral able to subsist only on some particular kind of food, it is\nnecessary that their birth should occur in the immediate proximity of\nsuch food: and therefore that the egg should be so placed. Now this\ncircumstance would not be specially noteworthy if the locality selected\nfor the deposition of the egg were the same as that in which the parent\ninsect had been accustomed to find its own private enjoyments: we should\nreasonably say that the eggs were placed here, because the parents\nhappened to be here. The case, however, is very different.\n\nWe never find the egg of the Peacock Butterfly adhering to the leaf of a\ncabbage, nor that of the Garden White to the leaf of a nettle; but the\nnettle is invariably selected for the former, and a cruciferous plant\nfor the latter.\n\nYet there is nothing in the individual wants or likings of the\nButterfly, in either case, to account for this. Both the one and the\nother flutter through the sunny air, alight to drink the water of some\nslushy pool, rest on the expanding flowers and probe them for nectar, or\nsuck the exuding juices of an over-ripe fruit. But when did you ever see\nthe gorgeous-eyed Peacock feeding on a nettle, or the White on a\ncabbage? Eagerly as they seek these plants, it is solely for the purpose\nof depositing their eggs where instinct teaches them their unborn\nprogeny will find suitable food.\n\nSupposing, therefore, we had found the egg of either of these\nbutterflies at the moment of its creation, we should assuredly have\nfound it on the nettle or the cabbage (as the case might be); because to\nsuppose it in any other situation would be equivalent to supposing it so\nplaced as that the end of its creation--the life of the species\ncreated--would be _ipso facto_ frustrated. But, finding it so, the\nquestion naturally arises,--Why here, and not elsewhere? and the only\npossible answer, on the ground of phenomena, is, Because the parent\nchose this situation for it. And thus we are inevitably thrown back to\nan anterior generation, which is equivalent to past time.\n\nAgain, if we had seen the egg of the Nut Weevil (_Balaninus nucum_) just\ncome from the creative hand of God, we should certainly have found it\nwithin the immature soft-shelled hazel-nut, because there alone would\nthe grub when hatched meet with \"food convenient for\" it. And yet if we\nhad sought (ignorant of the fact of its recent creation) the reason of\nits being there, our acquaintance with entomology would have pointed to\nthe parent beetle, who, with her jaws placed at the tip of a long\nslender snout, had bored a tiny hole in the tender shell, and had then\nprojected the egg from her abdomen into the interior.\n\nThe eggs of the _Oestrid\u00e6_--for example, the Worble of the Ox\n(_Oestrus bovis_) or the Bot of the Sheep (_Oe. ovis_)--would be\ndiscovered in no other circumstances than beneath the skin of the\nformer, and at the edge of the nostrils of the latter. For these are the\nrespective situations in which the egg is always deposited, that of the\nWorble hatching _in situ_, and forming a superficial abscess in\ncommunication with the external air, and that of the Sheep-bot producing\na larva which crawls up the nostrils of the poor animal, till it finds a\nsuitable resting-place in the frontal sinuses of the skull. To suppose\nthe egg in any other circumstances than those which I have mentioned,\nwould be to consign it to certain destruction. Yet does not its presence\nthere bear witness to the eclectic care of the parent Gadfly, whose\nunerring instinct knew how to seek and select the right position?\n\nIf you had set yourself to look for the egg of a _Pimpla manifestator_,\na common Cuckoo-fly, where would you have looked for it, but in the\nfatty tissues of a wild bee's grub, that was lodged in a deep hole in\nsome old post? If you had sought elsewhere, you would surely have been\ndisappointed. And would not its presence there bear testimony to the\nlengthened ovipositor of the well-known brisk and busy fly, and to its\nremarkable habits?[93]\n\nThe grub of the Pill Chafer or Tumble-dung Beetle (_Phan\u00e6us_) feeds on\nthe ordure of _Mammalia_. And, in order that the newly-hatched young may\nhave a copious supply of food at hand, the parent chafer with its jaws\ndetaches a mass of recent ordure, which it then rolls over the ground\nwith its hind feet, until it acquires a globular form, and a coating of\nearth or sand. An egg is then deposited in the centre of the ball, which\nis rolled into a hole made in the earth to receive it. The coating of\nearth drying and hardening, keeps the interior of the mass fresh and\nmoist until the young grub is hatched, when it at once begins to devour\nits savoury and delicate provision.\n\nIt would be vain to search for the egg of a _Cynips_ except within a\nvegetable gall, or at least within the tissues of a plant that are going\nto produce one. Take as an example _C. quercus_, which produces the\nspongy excrescence well known as the common Oak-apple. The female\nGall-fly is furnished with an ovipositor in the shape of a very fine\ncurved needle, with which she punctures the tender bark of an oak shoot,\nlodging an egg in the perforation. Stimulated by some fluid, probably,\nwhich is poured into the wound at the same time, the sap forms a\npeculiar tissue around the egg, swelling into a large ball, on which the\nyoung grub begins to feed eagerly, and in which it finds the only\nnutriment on which it could subsist.\n\nNow, if we had found the egg of a Gall-fly newly created, we should\ncertainly have found it in a gall; and the gall would have afforded us\nindubitable evidence of the wounding of the vegetable tissues, and of\nthe organ, secretion, and instinct of the tiny fly by which the process\nhad been effected. The evidence would be irresistible, but of course it\nwould be fallacious.\n\nLet us now look at a few examples in which the egg is found in\ninvariable association not merely with something that the parent has\nfound for it, but with something that has proceeded from her, a part of\nherself.\n\nOf this nature are the eggs of that beautiful, but most cacodious,\nlace-winged fly, _Chrysopa perla_. If you had seen one of these (or\nmore) at the instant of its creation, you would have seen a tiny oval\nbody placed at the extremity of an elastic footstalk half-an-inch in\nlength, and as fine as a hair, standing erect from the surface of a\nleaf. This thread is composed of a gummy secretion, evolved in a gland\nattached to the oviduct of the female Lace-fly. When she deposits an\negg, she first exudes a drop of this gum on the surface of a leaf, and\nthen, elevating her abdomen, the viscid substance is drawn out in a\nthread, which presently hardening in the air, the egg is left at the tip\nof the filament. An experienced entomologist, on seeing this object,\nwould have no hesitation in declaring the origin of the footstalk to be\nthe gum-gland of the female _Chrysopa_; and yet he would certainly have\ndrawn a false inference in the case that I am supposing.\n\n[Illustration: LACE-FLY AND EGGS.]\n\nMany Spiders enclose their eggs in an envelope, the produce of their own\nbowels. Take an interesting example, as narrated by the eloquent Mr.\nKirby. \"There is a Spider common under clods of earth (_Lycosa\nsaccata_), which may at once be distinguished by a white globular silken\nbag, about the size of a pea, in which she has deposited her eggs,\nattached to the extremity of her body. Never miser clung to his treasure\nwith more tenacious solicitude than this spider to her bag. Though\napparently a considerable incumbrance, she carries it with her\neverywhere. If you deprive her of it, she makes the most strenuous\nefforts for its recovery; and no personal danger can force her to quit\nthe precious load. Are her efforts ineffectual? a stupefying melancholy\nseems to seize her; and, when deprived of this first object of her\ncares, existence itself appears to have lost its charms. If she succeeds\nin regaining her bag, or you restore it to her, her actions demonstrate\nthe excess of her joy. She eagerly seizes it, and with the utmost\nagility runs off with it to a place of security.\n\n\"The attachment of this affectionate mother is not confined to her eggs.\nAfter the young spiders are hatched, they make their way out of the bag\nby an orifice which she is careful to open for them, and without which\nthey could never escape; and then, like the young of the Surinam toad\n(_Rana pipa_), they attach themselves in clusters upon her back, belly,\nhead, and even legs; and in this situation, where they present a very\nsingular appearance, she carries them about with her, and feeds them\nuntil their first moult, when they are big enough to provide their own\nsubsistence.\"[94]\n\nI waive the argument derived from the fact of the apparent necessity of\nthe mother's care for the new-born young. But the mother's care is\nindispensable to the appearance of the young at all; not only because\nthe eggs are the produce of her ovary, but also because the envelope\nwhich protects them is the produce of her spinning-glands.\n\nThere is a furry moth, by no means uncommon, known to collectors as the\nGipsy (_Hypogymna dispar_), the eggs of which require to be protected by\nan elaborate covering, either from extremes of temperature, from light,\nor from certain electric conditions of the atmosphere. The protection is\nafforded at the expense of the hair which clothed the mother herself.\nHer ovipositor is furnished with a pair of nippers, by means of which\nshe plucks off her own hairs, and makes with them a flat cushion on the\nsurface of a leaf. On this she deposits her eggs in successive layers;\nand when the full number is laid, she covers them with a roof of hair,\nslanting downwards and outwards from an apex, so artfully arranged, like\nthe thatch of a cottage, as effectually to throw off water; each layer\nof hairs overlapping the preceding, and all preserving the same\ndirection, so that, when finished, the work resembles a smooth and well\nbrushed piece of fur.\n\nIf, then, a patch of eggs newly-created had been subjected to our\ninspection, we should have found them snugly protected by their conical\nroof of thatch; and when we came to examine the thatch microscopically,\nwe should have found it composed of the hairs of _Hypogymna_. And thus\nagain we should have an indubitable and yet deceptive record of a\npreceding existence.\n\nThe numerous species of the genus _Coccus_, to which we are indebted for\ncochineal, lac, and other products valuable in commerce, afford me an\nillustration of my argument, more striking than any of the above. In the\ncase of the lac insect (_C. lacca_), for example, the female resembles a\nlittle hemispherical scale on the twig of a tree. At a certain period\nof her life, a pellucid, glutinous substance begins to exude from the\nmargins of her body, which by and by completely covers it, cementing her\nfirmly to the branch, from which she never afterwards moves. She now\nproceeds to lay her eggs, which one by one as they are extruded are\nthrust under her, between her abdomen and the surface of the branch. The\nresult of this is, that when the whole are laid, they occupy pretty\nnearly the same position in relation to the mother as they did before,\nwith this exception, that the abdominal integuments, which before were\nbeneath them, are now above them, and are in close contact with those of\nthe back, so that both together make a double, but still a thin, arched\nroof over the heap of eggs, which are thus protected till the hatching\nof the young, when they eat their way out of their long dead mother.\n\nLet me now make my usual application. You say the _Coccus_ was created\nnot an adult insect, which would involve the prochronic stages of its\nmetamorphosis, but as a germ, that is an egg (for the germ of an insect\nis an egg, and nothing else): well, here is a batch of Coccus-eggs just\ncreated, covered with the scaly roof which is necessary to their\nexistence. But this scale is not a record of the mother, but the mother\nherself, _a prochronic mother_, of course!\n\nOther genera of this wonderful class of animals yield us evidences of a\nsomewhat different character, in the structures which the parents form\nfor the reception of their eggs.\n\nOne of the most complex and elaborate pieces of mechanism found in any\nanimal organ is the ovipositor of the Sawflies (_Tenthredinid\u00e6_). I\ncannot here describe it at length; it may suffice to say that it\nconsists of two saw-plates, working separately and in opposite\ndirections, the teeth of which are cut into finer teeth; and two\nsupporting plates, very similar to the saws in shape and appearance. The\nwhole flat side of the saw is, moreover, covered with minute sharp\npoints, which give the action of a rasp to the instrument, in addition\nto that of saw.\n\nBy means of this complicated apparatus the parent fly cuts a groove in\nthe twig of the proper shrub, say, a rose-bush. When it is made, the\nplates are slightly separated, and an egg is laid in the groove. The saw\nis now withdrawn, and a frothy secretion is deposited, which appears to\nbe intended, by its hardening, to prevent the growth of the wood from\nclosing upon the egg, before the time of hatching arrives.\n\nIf, then, any of the species of _Tenthredo_ had been called into primal\nexistence as an egg, it must have been within such a groove as this; and\nthe groove, if carefully examined, would have presented evidences of\nhaving been formed and filled by the curious implement of the parent\nfly.\n\nThose obscure and obscene Insects, the Cockroach tribe (_Blattad\u00e6_),\nsecrete an extraordinary covering for the protection of their eggs.\n\"Instead of being laid separately, the eggs are, when deposited,\nenclosed in a horny case, or capsule, variable in its form in different\nspecies but generally of a more or less compressed oval shape,\nresembling a small bean. There is a longitudinal slit in the margin of\nthe capsule, each side of which is defended by a narrow serrated plate,\nfitting closely to its fellow. The inside of this egg-case is divided\ninto two spaces, in each of which is a row of separate compartments,\nevery one enclosing an egg, so that the whole resembles the pod of some\nleguminous vegetable. This capsule, with its precious contents, is\nconstantly carried about by the female for a week or a fortnight, and is\nthen fastened, by means of a glutinous fluid, in some safe locality.\nThe slit of the capsule is strongly coated with cement, so as to be even\nstronger than the other parts. In this capsule the young larv\u00e6 are\nhatched, and immediately discharge a fluid which softens the cement, and\nenables them to push open the slit, through which they escape; after\ntheir exit the slit shuts again so closely, that it appears as entire as\nbefore. In some species it would seem that the females themselves\nliberate their offspring by seizing the capsule when the larv\u00e6 are fit\nfor escape, and tearing it with the aid of their forelegs from end to\nend, by which means the enclosed larv\u00e6 are set at liberty.\"[95]\n\nIt is impossible to read this description without being reminded of the\nmanner in which the bean or other leguminous seed links itself with a\nformer generation by means of the dehiscent legume, itself a production\nof the parent plant. And the same reasoning applies to this case, as to\nthe other;--the egg, if the _Blatta_ was created in that stage, would\ntriumphantly show in the pod with which it was covered, a record of past\nprocesses.\n\nSo, once more, with the immense tribes of solitary Bees, Wasps, and\nSpheges. I shall mention but one example, from my own experience. It is\nthe Dirt Dauber (_Pelopoeus flavipes_) of North America. The female of\nthis elegant fly, when about to lay her eggs, builds up a tubular nest\nof cells with fine mud, which she makes by mingling and kneading\nroad-dust with her saliva. Each tube consists of several cells,\nseparated by transverse partitions of the mortar; and in each, before\nshe closes it up, she lays a single egg, which she then covers with\nspiders which are to constitute the food of the grub when hatched, and\nto last it during the whole period of its larval growth. Dead spiders\nwould not do, for their bodies would either dry up, or become putrescent\nlong before the young grub could devour them. On the other hand, if a\nnumber of these fierce and carnivorous creatures were immured, in\nhealth, they would soon destroy one another. To obviate this, the\nparent-fly ingeniously stings every spider just sufficiently to\nparalyse, without killing it. Thus nearly a score of living spiders are\npacked away in a cell scarcely larger than a lady's thimble; and thus\nthey remain fresh and succulent food for the larva, not only till it is\nready to begin its eating task, but even to the close of its repast.\n\nI think this a particularly instructive example. The _Pelopoeus_ was\nindubitably created; for it exists. As indubitably it was created in\nsome stage of its cyclical life-history. If as an imago, then I press\nthe argument from the necessity of its previous metamorphoses. If as a\npupa, or a larva, or an egg, each of these conditions of life was\nentirely passed as an inmate of the mud-walled cottage; which, cottage\nwas built and stocked with food by the industry and skill of the\nparent-fly. The grub could not have lived without the stored spiders;\nthe spiders could not have been stored (_normally_) without the agency\nof the fly.\n\nIn some other instances the connexion between germ and parent is patent\nto the eye. The beautiful Star-fish, _Cribella_, passes through all its\ninfant metamorphoses, changing from an ovum to an Infusory, thence to a\nPluteus (or what is analogous to it), thence to a Star-fish, all in the\nmarsupium provided for the occasion, by the drawing together of the arms\nof the patient mother. The female _Brachionus_ carries its deposited\neggs attached to the hinder part of its body; and thus we can trace,\nthrough their transparent coats, the gradual development of the organs\nof the embryo,--the coloured eye, the rotatory cilia, the complex\nmastax,--and even detect the vigorous movements of these and other\nparts, while yet carried hither and thither by the parent.\n\n[Illustration: FEMALE BRACHIONUS, WITH EGGS.]\n\nBut further, in the class from which I have taken this last\nillustration--that of the ROTIFERA--there are examples of viviparous\ngenera; and these, because of the perfect transparency of all the\ninteguments, are peculiarly instructive and germane to my argument.\n\nIn _Rotifer macrurus_ the ovary with its germinal vesicles is distinctly\nseen occupying one side of the animal. From this one of the vesicles\nenlarges, until it becomes a long-oval translucent sac, nearly filling\nthe whole left side of the visceral cavity. A kind of spasmodic movement\nis suddenly observed in this oblong ovum, and instantly we see, in its\nplace, a well-developed living young; as distinctly visible as if it\nwere excluded. It lies in a bent position, with its foot upturned; is\nnearly half the length of the parent; is furnished with a proboscis,\nwith a pair of crimson eyes, with ciliary wheels, with a mastax whose\ntoothed hemispheres frequently work vigorously, and with all the viscera\nproper to the species.\n\n[Illustration: PREGNANT ASPLANCHNA.\n\n_a._ _Unborn young._]\n\nIn the beautiful, comparatively large, and economically singular genus,\n_Asplanchna_, the same process of development can be watched with\nperfect facility through every stage.\n\nIn the body of the female parent, as transparent as the clearest glass,\nthe band-like ovary is seen floating in the visceral cavity, with\nseveral ova in various degrees of advancement. We trace one of these\ntill it becomes a manifestly living young in the ovisac, lying along at\nthe bottom of the parental cavity, more than one-third of whose volume\nis occupied by it:--supposing it to be a female infant. All its\norgans,--the eyes, the jaws, the stomach, the pancreatic glands, _the\novary with its nuclei_, the muscles, the rotatory cilia, &c. can be\ntraced with the utmost distinctness long before birth, and its motions\nare strong and voluntary.\n\nNeither in this case, nor in that of _Rotifer_, does the young animal\npass through any metamorphosis; the unborn young has the full\ndevelopment of the parent, in every respect but size. In each case, the\n_visible_ life-history of the individual commences not at birth, but at\na period long antecedent, if indeed it can be said to commence at all,\nwhere we see it gradually developed from a nucleus, which was an\nintegral part of the parental ovary, _even before that parent's birth_.\n\nIn the case of the amusing little Water-fleas (_Daphnia_), we have\nanother example of viviparous generation, which, owing to the same cause\nas in the ROTIFERA,--the transparency of the integument, can be followed\nthrough all its stages by the eye of the observer. The eggs of this\nlittle Crustacean are deposited in a special chamber within the valves\nof the parent, where they are hatched. The young remain in their\nreceptacle for a period, which varies according to the temperature, but\nlong enough for them to undergo important changes in structure, and to\npass their first moult.[96]\n\nHere, again, it is impossible to select a condition which does not take\nhold of a pre-existence; for the youngest independent stage is dependent\non earlier stages; and these are passed in visible connexion with the\nparent.\n\nIt is true there is in this genus, another mode of reproduction, by\nmeans of eggs which are thrown off enveloped in an organic covering,\ncalled the ephippium. If this condition be selected for the argument of\nmy supposed opponent, I reply that it amounts to nearly the same thing;\nonly the case will then come into the category of those animals whose\nearliest stages are protected by coverings formed from the body of the\nparent,--like the _Hypogymna_, and the Cockroach, already alluded to.\n\nWhere then, in these species, can we possibly select a stage of life,\nwhich is not inseparably and even visibly connected with a previous\nstage?\n\nIf we come to the vertebrate creatures, the argument becomes assuredly\nnot less convincing. The formidable Shark, which we considered as a\nwell-toothed adult ready for slaughter, let us suppose to have been\ncreated in the harmlessness of infancy. It is a slender thing, some ten\nor twelve inches long, bent upon itself, inclosing in the ring thus\nmade, the vitellus or yelk-bag, the contents of which are in process of\nbeing absorbed into the abdomen. But the whole,--Shark, yelk-bag, and\nall--is imprisoned in a brown horny capsule, that looks like a\npillow-case, with long tapes appended to the four corners.\n\nThis very peculiar protecting capsule points clearly to a peculiar\nstructure in the parent. The embryo was not inclosed in the pillow-case,\nat its first formation; but, in the course of its descent from the ovary\nthrough the oviduct, it had to pass a region of the latter, where was a\nthick glandular mass,--the nidamental gland,--whose office it was to\nsecrete a dense layer of albumen, with which, the embryo became\ninvested. This substance took the form of the flattened purse, or\npillow-case, with produced angles, above described, and on its exclusion\nfrom the duct assumed a very tough horny consistence, and a dark\nmahogany colour.\n\nThe comparative anatomist would, therefore, without the least\nhesitation, refer the origin of the investing capsule to the nidamental\nglands of the female Shark; but supposing the embryo to be but just\ncreated, his physiological science would only lead him to a false\nconclusion.\n\nIf the Tree-frog afforded us evidence of pre-existent time, in the\nmetamorphosis which it must naturally have experienced from the tadpole\nto the reptilian condition, what shall we say to that strange and\nuncouth member of the same class,--the Surinam Toad (_Pipa_)? Little\nwould be gained by selecting the germ-stage, as the presumed epoch of\ncreation in this case; for, according to the extraordinary economy of\nthis genus, the male acts as midwife, and the female as wet-nurse, to\nthe hopeful progeny.\n\n\"As fast as the female deposits her eggs, the male who attends her\narranges them on her broad back, to the number of fifty or upwards. The\ncontact of these eggs with the skin appears to produce a sort of\ninflammation; the skin of the back swells, and becomes covered with pits\nor cells, which enclose each a single egg, the surface of the back\nresembling the closed cells of a honeycomb. The female now betakes\nherself to the water; and in these cells the eggs are not only hatched,\nbut the tadpoles undergo their metamorphosis, emerging in a perfect\ncondition, though very small, after a lapse of _eighty-two days_ from\nthe time in which the eggs were placed in their respective pits.\"\n\nTo a tyro in animal physiology it might seem that the smooth rounded egg\nof a bird or a lizard, presents an example of an organism in the\nsimplest possible condition, and in a stage which, if any can be, is\nindependent of anything that went before.\n\nBut is it so? Let us see. Here is the egg of the common Fowl. I take it\nin my hand, and perceive nothing but an uniform, smooth, hard, white\nsurface. This I break, and find that it is a thin layer of calcareous\nsubstance, which, on microscopical examination, proves to be composed of\nminute polygonal particles, so agglutinated as to leave open spaces in\nthe interstices of their contiguous angles.\n\nBelow this calcareous shell I find a membrane (_membrana putaminis_),\nwhich seems, from its thinness in most parts, to be single, but which is\nseparated into two layers at the large end of the egg.\n\n[Illustration: HEN'S EGG.]\n\nWithin this membrane there is another (_the chalaza_) which, closely\nenveloping the yelk, passes off from it towards each extremity of the\negg in the form of a twisted cord.\n\nThen comes a delicate membrane (_memb. vitelli_) in close contact with,\nand enveloping the orange-coloured yelk; which latter carries, on one\npoint of its globular surface, the thin _blastoderm_, or germinal\nmembrane.\n\nThe yelk-globe, fastened by its twisted _chalaz\u00e6_, is suspended in a\nglairy fluid (albumen), which fills the space between it and the\n_membrana putaminis_. This fluid, though apparently homogeneous, is\nreally composed of many layers, and the innermost of these it is which\nis condensed into the _chalaza_.\n\nSuch, then, is the complex structure of this apparently simple object.\nWhat light can it throw on our inquiry?\n\nEach of these component parts bears witness to a succession of past\nperiods. The yelk with its germ was first formed, escaping naked, or\nclothed only with its own excessively delicate membrane, from its ovisac\ninto the oviduct. Through the course of this tube it now slowly\ndescended, receiving successive investments as it proceeded. The albumen\nwas deposited layer upon layer from the mucous membrane of the upper\npart of the oviduct; the first depositions condensing into the\n_chalaza_. By and by it came down to a region of the oviduct where a\ntenacious secretion was poured out, which, investing the albumen, soon\nhardened into a substance resembling thin parchment, and formed the\n_membrana putaminis_; two successive layers of this were deposited,\nbetween which a bubble of gas, chiefly composed of oxygen generated in\nthe interval, was inclosed. Then it descended still farther, to a part\nwhere the lining membrane of the duct was endowed with the power of\nsecreting calcareous matter, which, as above stated, was deposited in a\nthin layer of polygonal atoms. And now, having received all its\ncomponents, and having arrived at the orifice of the duct, the egg was\nlaid.\n\nHere, then, there is abundant evidence of successive processes, which\nmust have preceded the existence of this complete and perfect egg. But\nthere is yet one more evidence which I have reserved to the last,\nbecause it is peculiarly distinct and palpable, even to the senses.\n\nThe _chalaza_, we see, is twisted at each pole of the yelk-globe, until\nit resembles a piece of twine: what is the meaning of this? It was, as I\nobserved, deposited as a loosely enveloping membrane in the upper part\nof the oviduct; the yelk-globe, however, was progressively descending;\nand, as it descended, _it continually revolved upon its axis_; by means\nof which rotation the investing membrane was gathered at each pole into\na spirally twisted cord, stretching from the yelk to the ends of the\n_membrana putaminis_. Thus it presents us with an unmistakeable record\nof what took place in the earlier periods of the descent.\n\nWe saw distinct traces of the past in the structure of a feather. But\nthe feathers have already begun to develop before the young bird leaves\nthe egg. And the structure of the egg carries us back to the oviduct of\nthe parent-fowl.\n\nAt what stage of existence, then, could a bird, by possibility, have\nbeen created, which did not present distinct records of prochronic\ndevelopment?\n\nIf we come to the MAMMALIA, the impossibility of finding such a stage\nbecomes only more and more obvious. For it is a law in physiology, that\nthe higher the grade of organization assigned to any being, the more it\nis assisted in infancy by the parent.\n\n\"This law is remarkably exemplified in the class MAMMALIA, which\nunquestionably ranks at the head of the animal kingdom, in respect to\ndegree of intelligence and general elevation of structure. It is the\nuniversal and most prominent characteristic of this class, that the\nyoung are retained within the body of the female parent, until they have\nmade considerable progress in their development; that, whilst there,\nthey derive their support almost immediately from her blood; and that\nthey are afterwards nourished for some time by a secretion which she\naffords.\"[97]\n\nThe foetus of the Kangaroo, when expelled from the womb, is scarcely\nmore than an inch in length. Its limbs and its tail are indeed formed,\nbut the imperfect creature has been compared to an earthworm, for the\ncolour and semi-transparency of the integument. In this condition it is\nunable to find and seize the nipple, and equally unable to draw\nsustenance therefrom, by its own unaided efforts. The _milk is ejected_,\nby the _muscular action of the mother_, into the throat of the foetus,\nand there is a peculiar and beautiful contrivance to obviate the danger\nof the injected fluid's passing into the trachea instead of the\noesophagus.\n\nYet, from this helpless naked condition to that of the active,\nwell-clothed, experienced young, able to quit the maternal pouch at\nwill, and flee to it for protection, there is a well-understood and\nperfectly appreciable concatenation of stages, each of which looks back\nto, and depends on, those previously existing. And, during the whole of\nthese, the mother's presence is necessary to the comfort, and, for the\ngreater part of them, to the very existence of the infant.\n\nThus, once more, there is no condition of the animal, on which we may\nfix, as being so simple, as to have no retrospective history.\n\nThe umbilical cicatrix I have already alluded to; but I may be permitted\nto mention it again; because, in all the higher MAMMALIA, at least, it\nexists, throughout life, an eloquent witness to the organic connexion of\nthe individual with a mother, and therefore to her pre-existence. If it\nwere legitimate to suppose that the first individual of the species Man\nwas created in the condition answering to that of a new-born infant,\nthere would still be the need of maternal milk for its sustenance, and\nmaternal care for its protection, for a considerable period; while, if\nwe carry on the suggested stage to the period when this provision is no\nlonger indispensable, the development of hair, nails, bones, &c., will\nhave proceeded through many stages. And, in either condition, the navel\ncord or its cicatrix remains, to testify to something anterior to both.\n\n\n\n\n\nXII.\n\nTHE CONCLUSION.\n\n     \"We have no experience in the creation of worlds.\"\n\n                                             CHALMERS.\n\n\nWe have passed, in review before us the whole organic world: and the\nresult is uniform; that no example can be selected from the vast\nvegetable kingdom, none from the vast animal kingdom, which did not at\nthe instant of its creation present indubitable evidences of a previous\nhistory. This is not put forth as a _hypothesis_, but as a _necessity_;\nI do not say that it was _probably_ so, but that it was _certainly_ so;\nnot that it _may have been thus_, but that it _could not have been\notherwise_.\n\nI do not touch the inorganic world: my acquaintance with chemistry is\ninadequate for this: perhaps the same law does not extend to the\ninorganic elements: perhaps their developments, and combinations are\nnot, like the economy of plants and animals, essentially and\nexclusively cyclical: perhaps carbon and oxygen and hydrogen could be\ncreated in conditions, which obviously did not depend on any previously\nexisting conditions. This I do not know: I neither affirm nor deny it.\nBut I think I have demonstrated in these pages, that such a cyclical\ncharacter does attach to, and is inseparable from, the history of all\norganic essences; and that creation can be nothing else than a series of\nirruptions into circles: that, supposing the irruption to have been made\nat what part of the circle we please, and varying this condition\nindefinitely at will,--we cannot avoid the conclusion that each organism\nwas from the first marked with the records of a previous being. But\nsince creation and previous history are inconsistent with each other; as\nthe very idea of the creation of an organism excludes the idea of\npre-existence of that organism, or of any part of it; it follows, that\nsuch records are _false_, so far as they testify to time; that the\ndevelopments and processes thus recorded have been produced without\ntime, or are what I have called _prochronic_.\n\nNor is this conclusion in the least degree affected by the actual\nchronology of creation. The phenomena were equally eloquent, and equally\nfalse, whether any individual organism were created six thousand years\nago, or innumerable ages; whether primitively, or after the successive\ncreations and annihilations of former organisms.\n\nThe law of creation supersedes the law of nature; so far, at least, as\nthe organic world is concerned. The law of nature, established by\nuniversal experience, is, that its phenomena depend upon certain natural\nantecedents: the law of creation is, that the same phenomena depend upon\n_no_ antecedents. The philosopher who should infer the antecedents from\nthe phenomena alone, without having considered the law of creation,\nwould be liable to form totally false conclusions. In order to be secure\nfrom error, he must first assure himself that creation is eliminated\nfrom the category of facts which he is investigating; and this he could\ndo only when the facts come within the sphere of personal observation,\nor of historic testimony. Up to such a period of antiquity as is covered\nby credible history, and within such a field of observation as history\nmay be considered fairly cognisant of,--the inference of physical\nantecedents from physical phenomena, in the animal or vegetable world,\nis legitimate and true. But, beyond that period, I cannot safely deduce\nthe same conclusion; because I cannot tell but that at any given moment\nincluded in my inquiry, creation may have occurred, and have been the\nabsolute beginning of the circular series.\n\nThe question of the actual age of any species, whether plant or animal,\nis one which cannot be answered, except on historic testimony. The\nsequence of cause and effect is not adequate to answer it; for a\nlegitimate use of this principle, supposing it the only element of the\ninquiry, would inevitably lead us to the eternity of all existing\norganic life.\n\nOne of the familiar street-exhibitions in the metropolis is a tiny coach\nand horses of glittering metal; which, by means of simple machinery,\ncourse round and round the margin of a circular table. Let us suppose\ntwo youths of philosophical turn to come up during the process. They\ngaze for a while, and one asks his companion the following question.\n\n\"How long do you suppose that coach has been running round?\"\n\n\"How long! for an indefinite period, for aught I know. I have counted\ntwenty-two turns, and can see no change: nor can I suggest any point\nwhere the course could have begun.\"\n\nHere a shrewd lad, carrying a grocer's basket, breaks in.\n\n\"Oh no; there have been only six-and-twenty turns altogether. Four turns\nhad been made when you came up. The whole began by the man taking the\ncarriage out of a box; then he set it down out there, just opposite to\nus, and gave it a little push with his finger, and it has been running\never since. I saw him do it.\"\n\nNow perhaps you will say that a glance at the machinery beneath the\ntable would show in a moment how many turns had been made, and how many\ncould be made. Very true: but what if the tramp had locked up his\nclock-work, and would not let you look at it?\n\nThe only evidence worth a rush is that of the lad who saw the whirligig\nset a-going.\n\nI wish it to be distinctly understood, that I am not proving the exact\nor approximate antiquity of the globe we inhabit. I am not attempting to\nshow that it has existed for no more than six thousand years. I wish\nthis to be distinctly stated, because I am sure I shall meet with many\nopponents unfair enough, or illogical enough, to misrepresent or\nmisunderstand my argument, and sound the trumpet of victory, because I\ncannot demonstrate _that_. _All_ I set myself to do, is to invalidate\nthe testimony of the witness relied on for the indefinitely remote\nantiquity; to show that in a very large and important field of nature,\nevidence exactly analogous to that relied on would inevitably lead to a\nfalse conclusion, and must, therefore, be rejected, or received only\ncontingently; received only as indicative of probability, and that only\nin the absence of any positive witness to the contrary.\n\nPerhaps it may be objected, that there is no sufficient analogy between\nthe phenomena from which the past history of a single organism is\ninferred, and those from which the past history of a world is inferred.\nIs there not?\n\nPermit me to repeat an illustration I have already used. The geologist\nfinds a fossil skeleton. His acquaintance with anatomy enables him to\npronounce that the objects found are bones. He sees cylinders, condyles,\ncavities for the marrow, scars of attachment of muscles and tendons,\nforamina for the passage of nerves and blood-vessels; he finds the\ninternal structure, no less than the form and surface, such as to leave\nnot a doubt that these are real _bones_. Now universal experience has\ntaught him that bones imply the existence of flesh; that flesh implies\nblood; that blood implies life; that life implies time. He therefore\nconcludes unhesitatingly, that this skeleton was once alive, and that\ntime passed over it in that living condition.\n\nIs not this process of reasoning exactly parallel to that which he would\nhave pursued if he had examined an animal the moment after its creation,\n(supposing this fact to be unknown to him,) and by which he would in\nlike manner have inferred past time? And where is the vital difference\nbetween the two cases, which would operate to make a conclusion which is\nmanifestly false in the one case, necessarily true in the other?\n\nOne of the most eminent of living botanists has set forth in striking\nterms the parallelism which I am suggesting. Speaking of the _shoot_ as\nthe vegetable individual, and the woody trunk as a kind of\never-accumulating ground, which supports successive generations of\nshoots, he uses the following comparison.\n\n\"The history of the grand development of nature on the surface of our\nglobe presents an analogy, which may perhaps serve to set this relation\nin a clear light. The successive geological formations superposed during\nthe course of countless ages, present, buried in their depths, the\ntraces of as many formations of the organic world, each of which\ncarpeted the then superior stratum of the earth with a new life, until\nit found its own grave in the succeeding formation, when a new uprising\nof organic life took its place. In the same way, the stem of a tree is a\nmultistratified ground, in whose layers the history of earlier growths\nis legibly preserved. The number of the woody layers indicates the\nnumber of the generations which have perished, _i. e._ the age of the\nwhole tree: a distinct annual ring is the monument of a vigorous season,\nan indistinct one of a bad season, a sickly one (which is often found\namong healthy ones) indicates the unhealthiness of the foliage of that\nparticular year. The practised woodman can decipher many facts of the\npast in the layers of the trunk; _e.g._ a good season for foliage or for\nseed, damage by frost or by insects, &c.\"[98]\n\nIn order to perfect the analogy between an organism and the world, so as\nto show that the law which prevails in the one obtains also in the\nother, it would be necessary to prove that the development of the\nphysical history of the world is circular, like that already shown to\ncharacterise the course of organic nature. And this I cannot prove. But\nneither, as I think, can the contrary be proved.\n\nThe life of _the individual_ consists of a series of processes which are\ncyclical. In the tree this is shown by the successive growths and deaths\nof series of leaves: in the animal by the development and exuviation of\nnails, hair, epidermis, &c.\n\nThe life of _the species_ consists of a series of processes which are\ncyclical. This has been sufficiently illustrated in the preceding pages,\nin the successive developments and deaths of generations of individuals.\n\nWe have reason to believe that species die out, and are replaced by\nother species, like the individuals which belong to the species, and the\norgans which belong to the individual. But is the life of _the species_\na circle returning into itself? In other words, if we could take a\nsufficiently large view of the whole plan of nature, should we discern\nthat the existence of species [Greek: d] necessarily involved the\npre-existence of species [Greek: g], and must inevitably be followed by\nspecies [Greek: e]? Should we be able to trace the same sort of relation\nbetween the tiger of Bengal and the fossil tiger of the Yorkshire caves,\nbetween _Elephas Indicus_ and _Elephas primigenius_, as subsists\nbetween the leaves of 1857 and the leaves of 1856; or between the oak\nnow flourishing in Sherwood Forest and that of Robin Hood's day, from\nwhose acorn it sprang?[99]\n\nI dare not say, we should; though I think it highly probable. But I\nthink you will not dare to say, we should _not_.[100]\n\nIt is certain that, when the Omnipotent God proposed to create a given\norganism, the course of that organism was present to his idea, as an\never revolving circle, without beginning and without end. He created it\nat some point in the circle, and gave it thus an arbitrary beginning;\nbut one which involved all previous rotations of the circle, though only\nas ideal, or, in other phrase, prochronic. Is it not possible--I do not\nask for more--that, in like manner, the natural course of the world was\nprojected in his idea as a perfect whole, and that He determined to\ncreate it at some point of that course, which act, however, should\ninvolve previous stages, though only ideal or prochronic?\n\nAll naturalists have speculated upon the great plan of Nature; a grand\narray of organic essences, in which every species should be related in\nlike ratio to its fellow species, by certain affinities, without gaps\nand without redundancies; the whole constituting a beautiful and perfect\nunity, a harmonious scheme, worthy of the infinite Mind that conceived\nit. Such a perfect plan has never been presented by any existing fauna\nor flora; nor is it made up by uniting the fossil faunas and floras to\nthe recent ones; _yet the discovery of the fossil world has made a very\nsignal approach to the filling up of the great outline_; and the more\nminutely this has been investigated, the more have hiatuses been\nbridged over, which before yawned between species and species, and\nlinks of connexion have been supplied which before were lacking.[101]\n\nIt is not necessary,--at least it does not seem so to me,--that all the\nmembers of this mighty commonwealth should have an actual, a diachronic\nexistence; anymore than that, in the creation of a man, his foetal,\ninfantile, and adolescent stages should have an actual, diachronic\nexistence, though these are essential to his normal life-history. Nor\nwould their diachronism be more certainly inferrible from the physical\ntraces of them, in the one case than in the other. In the newly-created\nMan, the proofs of successive processes requiring time, in the skin,\nhairs, nails, bones, &c. could in no respect be distinguished from the\nlike proofs in a Man of to-day; yet the developments to which they\nrespectively testify are widely different from each other, so far as\nregards the element of time. Who will say that the suggestion, _that the\nstrata of the surface of the earth, with their fossil floras and faunas,\nmay possibly belong to a prochronic development of the mighty plan of\nthe life-history of this world_,--who will dare to say that such a\nsuggestion is a self-evident absurdity? If we had no example of such a\nprocedure, we might be justified in dealing cavalierly with the\nhypothesis; but it has been shown that, without a solitary exception,\nthe whole of the vast vegetable and animal kingdoms were created,--mark!\nI do not say _may_ have been, but MUST have been created--on this\nprinciple of a prochronic development, with distinctly traceable\nrecords. It was _the law of organic creation_.\n\nIt may be objected, that, to assume the world to have been created with\nfossil skeletons in its crust,--skeletons of animals that never really\nexisted,--is to charge the Creator with forming objects whose sole\npurpose was to deceive us. The reply is obvious. Were the concentric\ntimber-rings of a created tree formed merely to deceive? Were the growth\nlines of a created shell intended to deceive? Was the navel of the\ncreated Man intended to deceive him into the persuasion that he had had\na parent?[102]\n\nThese peculiarities of structure were inseparable from the adult stage\nof these creatures respectively, without which they would not have been\nwhat they were. The Locust-tree could not have been an adult _Hymen\u00e6a_,\nwithout concentric rings;--nay, it could not have been an exogenous tree\nat all. The _Dione_ could not have been a _Dione_ without those\nfoliations and spines that form its generic character. The Man would not\nhave been a Man without a navel.\n\nTo the physiologist this is obvious; but some unscientific reader may\nsay, Could not God have created plants and animals without these\nretrospective marks? I distinctly reply, No! not so as to preserve their\nspecific identity with those with which we are familiar. A Tree-fern\nwithout scars on the trunk! A Palm without leaf-bases! A Bean without a\nhilum! A Tortoise without lamin\u00e6 on its plates! A Carp without\nconcentric lines on its scales! A Bird without feathers! A Mammal\nwithout hairs, or claws, or teeth, or bones, or blood! A Foetus\nwithout a placenta! I have indeed written the preceding pages in vain,\nif I have not demonstrated, in a multitude of examples, the absolute\nnecessity of retrospective phenomena in newly-created organisms. But if\nit can be undeniably shown in one single example, our failure to\nperceive it in ninety-nine other instances would in nowise invalidate\nthe deduction from that one. Granted that you can triumphantly convict\nme of a _non-sequitur_, in ninety-nine out of every hundred of the cases\nin which I have attempted to show this connexion; still, if I have\nconclusively proved that in one solitary instance an animal or a plant\nwas created with but one solitary evidence of pre-development, the\nprinciple for which I contend is established.\n\nI trust, however, it does not rest on one example, nor on twenty, nor on\na hundred. It may be thought that I have multiplied my illustrations\nneedlessly: ten times as many might have been given. I wished to show\nthat the proof is of a cumulative character: a single good example\nwould, indeed, have established the principle; but I wished to show how\nwidely applicable it is; that it is, indeed, of universal application in\nthe organic kingdoms.\n\nIf, then, the existence of retrospective marks, visible and tangible\nproofs of processes which were prochronic, was so necessary to organic\nessences, that they could not have been created without them,--is it\nabsurd to suggest the _possibility_ (I do no more) that the world itself\nwas created under the influence of the same law, with visible tangible\nproofs of developments and processes, which yet were only prochronic?\n\nAdmit for a moment, as a hypothesis, that the Creator had before his\nmind a projection of the whole life-history of the globe, commencing\nwith any point which the geologist may imagine to have been a fit\ncommencing point, and ending with some unimaginable acme in the\nindefinitely distant future. He determines to call this idea into actual\nexistence, not at the supposed commencing point, but at some stage or\nother of its course.[103] It is clear, then, that at the selected stage\nit appears, exactly as it would have appeared at that moment of its\nhistory, if all the preceding eras of its history had been real. Just as\nthe new-created Man was, at the first moment of his existence, a man of\ntwenty, or five-and-twenty, or thirty years old; physically, palpably,\nvisibly, so old, though not really, not diachronically. He appeared\nprecisely what he would have appeared had he lived so many years.\n\nLet us suppose that this present year 1857 had been the particular epoch\nin the projected life-history of the world, which the Creator selected\nas the era of its actual beginning. At his fiat it appears; but in what\ncondition? Its actual condition at this moment:--whatever is now\nexistent would appear, precisely as it does appear. There would be\ncities filled with swarms of men; there would be houses half-built;\ncastles fallen into ruins; pictures on artists' easels just sketched in;\nwardrobes filled with half-worn garments; ships sailing over the sea;\nmarks of birds' footsteps on the mud; skeletons whitening the desert\nsands; human bodies in every stage of decay in the burial-grounds. These\nand millions of other traces of the past would be found, _because they\nare found in the world now_; they belong to the present age of the\nworld; and if it had pleased God to call into existence this globe at\n_this_ epoch of its life-history, the whole of which lay like a map\nbefore his infinite mind, it would certainly have presented all these\nphenomena; not to puzzle the philosopher, but because they are\ninseparable from the condition of the world at the selected moment of\nirruption into its history; because they constitute its condition; they\nmake it what it is.\n\nHence the minuteness and undeniableness of the proofs of life which\ngeologists rely on so confidently, and present with such justifiable\ntriumph, do not in the least militate against my principle. The marks of\nHy\u00e6nas' teeth on the bones of Kirkdale cave; the infant skeletons\nassociated with adult skeletons of the same species; the abundance of\ncoprolites; the foot-tracks of Birds and Reptiles; the glacier-scratches\non rocks; and hundreds of other beautiful and most irresistible\nevidences of pre-existence, I do not wish to undervalue, nor to explain\naway. On the hypothesis that the actual commencing point of the world's\nhistory was subsequent to the occurrence of such things in the perfect\nideal whole, these phenomena would appear precisely as if the facts\nthemselves had been diachronic, instead of prochronic, as was really the\ncase.[104]\n\nPerhaps some one will say, \"All this might be tenable, supposing the\nworld were an organism. Your argument goes to show that organic essences\nin every stage of their existence present proofs of pre-existence; but\nwhat analogy is there between the lifeless inorganic globe (in which\nevidences of past processes are apparent, independent of the fossil\norganisms), and a living organic being,--plant or animal?\"\n\nI answer, The point in the economy of the organic creatures, on which\ntheir prochronism rests, is not the organic, but the circular condition\nof their being. The problem, then, to be solved, before we can certainly\ndetermine the question of analogy between the globe and the organism, is\nthis:--Is the life-history of the globe a cycle? If it is (and there are\nmany reasons why this is probable), then I am sure prochronism must\nhave been evident at its creation, since there is no point in a circle\nwhich does not imply previous points. At all events, geologists cannot\nprove that it is not.\n\nWherever we can discern a cyclical condition, there the law of which I\nam treating must hold good; and it certainly obtains in other things\nbeside organisms. When the inorganic crust of the globe was first cleft\nto contain rivers, whence came the water that flowed through the\nfissures? A river is the produce of rivulets, which issue from mountain\nsprings; these originate in the water that percolates through the soil;\nand this is derived from the rains, and snows, and dews, that are\ndeposited from the atmosphere. But there would be no deposition from the\natmosphere if the water had not first been carried up by evaporation;\nand the vaporable fluid is obtained from the moistened soil; from the\nlakes and rivers; and from the seas and oceans, whose loss is\nperpetually recruited from the flowing rivers. Here, then, we get a\ncircle closely analogous to that of organic being. Was a given drop of\nwater created as a component particle of a running stream? Its position\nand condition looked back to the mountain spring whence it must\nnaturally have issued. Was it called into being in the spring? It\nlooked up to the surface, whence it must have oozed. Was it formed on\nthe surface? It looked to the clouds, whence it must have dropped. Was\nit created in the cloud? It looked down to the surface of the lake or\nsea, whence it must have been raised. Was it created in the lake? It\nlooked to the river, whence it must have flowed.\n\nThe chief pelagic currents, which have hitherto so often been the\ndestruction of the navigator, but which may yet become his able and\nsubject servants, flow in circular systems. There is such an one in the\nsouthern part of the Indian Ocean, known as the Hurricane Region;\nanother immense one ever running round and round the North Pacific; and,\nabove all, that wondrous river of hot water--a river whose well-marked\nbanks are not solid earth, but cold water--the Gulf Stream.\n\n\"The fruit of trees belonging to the torrid zone of America is annually\ncast ashore on the western coasts of Ireland and Norway. Pennant\nobserves that the seeds of plants which grow in Jamaica, Cuba, and the\nadjacent countries, are collected on the shores of the Hebrides. Thither\nalso barrels of French wine, the remains of vessels wrecked in the West\nIndian seas, have been carried. In 1809 His Majesty's ship _Little\nBelt_ was dismasted at Halifax, Nova Scotia, and her bowsprit was found,\neighteen months after, in the Basque Roads. The mainmast of the\n_Tilbury_, buried off Hispaniola in the Seven Years' war, was brought to\nour shores.\"[105]\n\nThese facts are dependent on the eastward set of this majestic current;\nand so is another great physical fact of immeasurable importance to\nus;--the superiority in temperature of the western shores of Europe over\nthe eastern shores of North America. The harbour of St. John's,\nNewfoundland, is frequently fast closed by ice in the month of June; yet\nthe latitude of St. John's is considerably south of that of the port of\nBrest, in France.\n\nImpelled by the rotatory motion of the earth, and by the\ntrade-wind,[106] the equatorial waters of the Atlantic are ever urged, a\nbroad and rapid river, into the Caribbean sea, and the Gulf of Mexico,\nthe narrowing shores of which compress the stream as in a funnel. The\nAndes here present a slender but impregnable barrier to its further\nprogress westward; and the trend of the Isthmus turns it to the\nnorthward. Still finding no outlet, the impatient current, like a\nwild-beast pacing round its cage, courses the Gulf of Mexico, doubles\nthe peninsula of Florida, and pursues its way first to the north-east,\nand then to the east, crossing the Atlantic in a retrograde direction,\nuntil it laves with its warm billows the coasts of Europe. Here it turns\nto the southward, and after embracing the \"Fortunate\" isles that lie off\nthe African shores,--the Azores, the Madeiras, and the Canaries,--it\njoins the great equatorial set beneath the trade-wind, and returns on\nits westward course.\n\nThis mighty circulation of water must have been going on from the\ninstant that the earth commenced rotating on its axis, or (granting this\nto have been chronologically subsequent) from the instant the Atlantic\noccupied its present bed. Whether sooner or later, it commenced at\n_some_ instant; but at that instant all the previous elements of the\ncircle were presupposed, and a boundless succession of former circles.\nAn intelligent stranger, looking on the movement immediately after its\ncommencement, but ignorant of its origin, would not be able to assign\nany limit to its past duration. From his observation of the velocity of\nthe current in different parts of the circle, he would say with\nconfidence,--\"These identical particles of water, which I see now urged\non their ceaseless course towards the middle of the North Atlantic,\nwere, yesterday morning at this hour, in the latitude of the mouth of\nthe Chesapeake; on the morning before, off Cape Hatteras, on the morning\nbefore that, off Cape Lookout;\" and so backwards interminably.\n\nWhether the economy of the globe is circular, or not, I am not in a\nposition to show. But its movements certainly are; and so are the\nmovements of all the myriad worlds with which astronomy is conversant.\nAsteroids, planets, satellites, comets, suns,--nay, even the stellar\nuniverse itself--obey _in their motions_, the grand universal law of\ncircularity. Take any one of these;--our Moon. When its orbital motion\ncommenced, it commenced at some point or other of the circle which it\ndescribes in its course around the earth. The pre-existence, or at least\nthe co-existence, of the Earth, and also that of the Sun, are necessary\nto its motion. Supposing it possible for a spectator, furnished with\nmodern astronomical knowledge, to have looked at that instant on the\nnewly-spun orb, would he not confidently have inferred, from its\nposition at that moment, its position a week before? Would he not have\nfelt able to indicate with unhesitating certainty the solar and lunar\neclipses of a century or a chiliad before, just as he now calculates the\ntime of the eclipse that marked the death of Herod the Great?\nUndoubtedly he would; for he would assume the constancy of those\nmovements which modern science has deduced from the observations of many\ncenturies; and, granting him the fact of their constancy, we could not\ninvalidate his conclusions. Yet _what_ would he have shown? The\nconditions and phenomena of bodies before they had begun to exist. The\nconditions are legitimately deducible; but they are prochronic\nconditions.\n\nThe mention of the celestial orbs suggests to remembrance the famous\nargument for the vast antiquity of the material universe, founded on the\ntime which is required for the propulsion of light. I believe it owes\nits origin to Sir William Herschel.\n\nSpeaking of the known velocity of light in connexion with the immense\ndistance of certain nebul\u00e6, that eminent astronomer made these\nremarks:--\n\n\"Hence it follows, that, when we... see an object of the calculated\ndistance at which one of these very remote nebul\u00e6 may still be\nperceived... the rays of light which convey its image to the eye must\nhave been more than nineteen hundred and ten thousand, that is, almost\n_two millions_, of years on their way; and that, consequently, so many\nyears ago, this object must already have had an existence in the\nsidereal heavens, in order to send out those rays by which we now\nperceive it.\"[107]\n\nThe notion has been amplified, with some interesting details, by a\nwriter in the _Scottish Congregational Magazine_ for _January 1847_; who\nthus throws the statements into a tabular form, and comments on them.\n\n     \"From the Moon, light comes to the earth in 1-1/4 second\n       \"    the Sun         \"          \"      in 8 minutes\n       \"    Jupiter         \"          \"      in 52  \"\n       \"    Uranus          \"          \"      in 2 hours\n       \" a fixed Star of 1st magnitude -- 3 to 12 years\n       \"        \"        2d      \"             20   \"\n       \"        \"        3d      \"             30   \"\n       \"        \"        4th     \"             45   \"\n       \"        \"        5th     \"             66   \"\n       \"        \"        6th     \"             96   \"\n       \"        \"        7th     \"            180   \"\n       \"        \"       12th     \"           4000   \"\n\n\"Now, as we see objects by the rays of light passing from those objects\nto our eye, it follows that we do not perceive the heavenly bodies, _as\nthey are_ at the moment of our seeing them, but _as they were_ at the\ntime the rays of light by which we see them left those bodies. Thus when\nwe look at the moon, we see her, not as she is at the moment of our\nbeholding her disc, but as she was a second and a quarter before; for\ninstance, we see her not at the moment of her rising above the horizon,\nbut 1-1/4 second after she has risen. The sun also when he appears to us\nto have just passed the meridian, has already passed it by 8 minutes.\nSo, in like manner, of the planets and the fixed stars. We see Jupiter,\nnot as he is at the moment of our catching a sight of him, but as he was\n52 minutes before. Uranus appears to us, not as he is at the moment of\nour discovering him, but as he was 2 hours previously. And a star of the\n12th magnitude presents itself to our eye as it was 4,000 years ago: so\nthat, suppose such a star to have been annihilated 3,000 years back, it\nwould still be visible on the earth's surface for 1,000 years to come:\nor, suppose a star of the same magnitude had been created at the time\nthe Israelites left Egypt, it will not be perceptible on the earth for\nnearly 700 years from this date.\"\n\nBeautiful, and at first sight unanswerable as this argument is, it\nfalls to the ground before the spear-touch of our Ithuriel, the doctrine\nof prochronism. There is nothing more improbable in the notion that the\nsensible undulation was created at the observer's eye, with all the\npre-requisite undulations prochronic, than in the notion that blood was\ncreated in the capillaries of the first human body. The latter we have\nseen to be a fact: is the former an impossibility?\n\nIt may perhaps be said:--\"The traces of prochronism you have adduced in\ncreated organisms may be granted, because they are inseparable from the\npresumed condition of those organisms respectively. The blood in the\nvessels, the hair, the teeth, the nails, may afford evidences of past\nprocesses; but then those are only past stages of what yet exists. The\ncase, however, is not parallel with the fossil skeletons, many of which\nhave no connexion with anything now existing. The concentric rings of a\ntimber-tree are essential to its adult state; but how is the existence\nof the _Pterodactyle_ or the _Megatherium_ essential to that of the\nrecent _Draco volans_, or the South American Sloth? Can you show in the\nnew-formed creature any trace of some organ which does not come into its\npresent condition of being,--of something which has quite passed away?\"\n\nPerhaps I can. The very concentric rings of the tree are considered by\nbotanists as, in some sense, dead. The paradoxical dictum of\nSchleiden,--\"No tree has leaves,\"[108]--is grounded on this\ncircumstance, that the woody portion of the mass is the inert result of\nformer generations, and that the present race of leaves is growing, not\nout of the woody portion of the tree, but out of its herbaceous\nextremities, \"which grow upon the woody stem _as upon a ground_, formed\nby the process of vegetation. This common ground, namely, the woody\nstem, _which is almost lifeless_ in comparison with the herbaceous parts\nengaged in active growth, is annually covered with a vigorous sheath\nunder the protecting bark; and this sheath is the ground of the\nnourishment of all the vegetating herbaceous extremities.\"[109]\n\nThe polygonal plates into which the bark of the _Testudinaria_ divides,\nnot only show many superposed lamin\u00e6, at any given moment of its adult\ncondition, but also bear witness, in the broad existent surface of each\none, to former lamin\u00e6, yet older than the oldest now present, which have\ndisintegrated and dropped off.\n\nThe Palm and the Tree-fern show, in their trunk-scars, evidences of\norgans which have completely died away and disappeared; while, between\nthese scars and the generation of living fronds, there is, at any given\nmoment of the tree's history, a series of fronds which are quite dead\nand dry, but which have not yet disappeared.\n\nThe _Nerita_, a genus of beautiful shells from the tropical seas,\ndissolves away and removes, in the progress of growth, the spiral\ncolumn, which originally formed the axis of development; so that, in\nadult age, the spiral direction of the whole testifies to the past\nexistence of a column which has quite disappeared.\n\nIn that species of _Murex_,[110] which, on account of the long and\nslender rostellum, and the spines with which it is covered, is known to\ncollectors as the Thorny Woodcock (_M. tenuispina_), the shelly spines\nof the earlier whorls would interfere with such as came, in process of\ndevelopment, to be superposed on them; for they cross the area which is\nto be the cavity enclosed by the advancing lip. They are, however,\nremoved by absorption; but not so completely but that traces may still\nbe discovered where they formerly existed: evidences of the quondam\nexistence of what exists no longer.\n\nTowards one side of the upper surface of the pretty Star-fish, _Cribella\nrosea_, (as in many other species of Star-fishes,) there is a curious\nlittle mark, known as the _madreporic plate_, the use of which has\ngreatly puzzled naturalists. Sars, the Norwegian zoologist, has unveiled\nthe mystery.[111] The young larva, before it assumes the stellar form,\nis furnished with a sort of thick column, divided into four diverging\nclubbed arms, which are adhering organs, ancillary to locomotion. In the\nprocess of development, however, new locomotive organs are formed; and\nthis four-fold column, being no longer needed, sloughs away; and that so\ncompletely, that not a trace of its existence remains, _except this\nscar_, or \"_madreporic plate_;\" which is therefore a permanent record of\nsomething that has quite passed away.\n\nBut the closest parallel to the relation borne by the skeleton of an\nextinct species to an extant one, is presented by that of the hilum to a\nseed, or of the umbilicus to a mammal. Each of these is a legible and\nundeniable, record of a being, whose individuality was totally distinct\nfrom that of the being by which it is presented, and of which all\nvestiges have disappeared, _save this record_. Nor is the parallel\nfounded on obscure or rare examples; both the umbilicus and the hilum\nare generally conspicuous; and both are extensively found in their\nrespective kingdoms, the former pervading the viviparous Vertebrata, the\nlatter characterising the whole of the cotyledonous types of vegetation.\n\nOnce more. An objection may arise to the reception of the prochronic\nprinciple, on the ground that the examples I have adduced are not to be\ncompared, in point of grandeur, with the mighty revolutions, which are\npresumed to have written their records in the crust of the globe; and\nthat hence no analogy can be fairly drawn from one to the other. To the\nphilosopher, however, there is no great or small, as there is none in\nthe works of God. We have every reason to believe that He has wrought by\nthe same laws in all portions of his universe: the principle on which an\napple falls from the branch to the ground, is the same as that which\nkeeps the planet Neptune in the solar system. I have shown that the\nprinciple of prochronic development obtains wherever we are able to test\nit; that is, wherever another principle, that of _cyclicism_, exists;\nwhether the cycle be that of a gnat's metamorphosis, or of a planet's\norbit. The distinction of great or small, grand or mean, does not apply\nto it. If it cannot be proved to be universal, it is only because we are\nnot sufficiently acquainted with some of the economies of nature to be\nable to pronounce with certainty whether they are cyclical or not. I am\nnot aware of any natural process, in which its existence can be\nabsolutely denied.\n\nAnd this makes all the difference in the world between my position and\nthat of the old simple-minded observers, with which a superficial reader\nmight think it to possess a good deal in common. A century ago, people\nused to talk of _lusus natur\u00e6_; of a certain _plastic power_ in nature;\nof abortive or initiative attempts at making things which were never\nperfected; of imitations, in one kingdom, of the proper subjects of\nanother, (as plants were supposed to be imitated by the frost on a\nwindow-pane, and by the dendritic forms of metals). Still later, many\npersons have been inclined to take refuge from the conclusions of\ngeology in the absolute sovereignty of God, asking,--\"Could not the\nOmnipotent Creator make the fossils in the strata, just as they now\nappear?\"\n\nIt has always been felt to be a sufficient answer to such a demand, that\nno reason could be adduced for such an exercise of mere power; and that\nit would be unworthy of the Allwise God.\n\nBut this is a totally different thing from that for which I am\ncontending. I am endeavouring to show that a grand LAW exists, by which,\nin two great departments of nature at least, the analogues of the fossil\nskeletons were formed without pre-existence. An arbitrary acting, and an\nacting on fixed and general laws, have nothing in common with each\nother.\n\nFinally, the acceptance of the principles presented in this volume, even\nin their fullest extent, would not, in the least degree, affect the\nstudy of scientific geology. The character and order of the strata;\ntheir disruptions and displacements and injections; the successive\nfloras and faunas; and all the other phenomena, would be _facts_ still.\nThey would still be, as now, legitimate subjects of examination and\ninquiry. I do not know that a single conclusion, now accepted, would\nneed to be given up, except that of actual chronology. And even in\nrespect of this, it would be rather a modification than a relinquishment\nof what is at present held; we might still speak of the inconceivably\nlong duration of the processes in question, provided we understand\n_ideal_ instead of _actual_ time;--that the duration was projected in\nthe mind of God, and not really existent.\n\nThe zoologist would still use the fossil forms of non-existing animals,\nto illustrate the mutual analogies of species and groups. His\nrecognition of their prochronism would in nowise interfere with his\nendeavours to assign to each its position in the scale of organic being.\nHe would still legitimately treat it as an entity; an essential\nconstituent of the great Plan of Nature; because he would recognise the\nPlan itself as an entity, though only an ideal entity, existing only in\nthe Divine Conception. He would still use the stony skeletons for the\ninculcation of lessons on the skill and power of God in creation; and\nwould find them a rich mine of instruction, affording some examples of\nthe adaptation of structure to function, which are not yielded by any\nextant species. Such are the elongation of the little finger in\n_Pterodactylus_, for the extension of the alar membrane; and the\ndeflexion of the inferior incisors in _Dinotherium_, for the purposes of\ndigging or anchorage. And still would he find, in the fossil forms,\nevidences of that complacency in beauty, which has prompted the Adorable\nWorkmaster to paint the rose in blushing hues, and to weave the fine\nlace of the dragonfly's wing. The whorls of the _Gyroceras_, the\nfoliaceous or zigzag sutures of the _Ammonites_, and the radiating\npattern of _Smithia_, are not less elegant than anything of the kind in\nexisting creation, in which, however, they have no parallels. In short,\nthe readings of the \"stone book\" will be found not less worthy of God\nwho wrote them, not less worthy of man who deciphers them, if we\nconsider them as prochronically, than if we judge them diachronically,\nproduced.\n\n[Illustration: GYROCERAS.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nHere I close my labours. How far I have succeeded in accomplishing the\ntask to which I bent myself, it is not for me to judge. Others will\ndetermine that; and I am quite sure it will be determined fairly, on the\nwhole. To prevent misapprehension, however, it may be as well to\nenunciate what the task was, which I prescribed, especially because\nother (collateral, hypothetical) points have been mooted in these pages.\n\nAll, then, that I consider myself responsible for is summed up in these\nsentences:--\n\nI. The conclusions hitherto received have been but inferences deduced\nfrom certain premises: the witness who reveals the premises does _not_\ntestify to the inferences.\n\nII. The process of deducing the inferences has been liable to a vast\nincoming of error, arising from the operation of a _Law_, proved to\nexist, but hitherto unrecognised.\n\nIII. The amount of the error thus produced we have no means of knowing;\nmuch less of eliminating it.\n\nIV. The whole of the facts deposed to by this witness are irrelevant to\nthe question; and the witness is, therefore, out of court.\n\nV. The field is left clear and undisputed for the one Witness on the\nopposite side, whose testimony is as follows:--\n\n\"IN SIX DAYS JEHOVAH MADE HEAVEN AND EARTH, THE SEA, AND ALL THAT IN\nTHEM IS.\"\n\n\n\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n\nAgave, 147.\n\nAmmonites, appearance of, 58.\n  profusion of, 65.\n\nAmphibia, foot-prints of, 52, 56.\n\nAnoplotherium, 69.\n\nAntediluvian hypothesis, 9.\n  untenable, 51.\n\n\nBabbage, Mr., opinions of, 25.\n\nBabiroussa, 262.\n\nBamboo, 134.\n\nBanyan, 164.\n\nBarnacle, development of, 217.\n\nBasalt, formation of, 66, 91.\n\nBeaches, raised, 83.\n\nBeard, 284.\n\nBeetle, egg of, 310.\n\nBelemnites, 58.\n\nBignonia, 168.\n\nBirds, earliest, 69.\n  gigantic, 82.\n  feathers of, 253.\n\nBlackwood, opinions of, 9.\n\nBlocks, transport of, 78.\n\nBlood, 275, 285.\n\nBones, structure of, 279.\n\nBotryllus, metamorphoses of, 222.\n\nBrachionus, eggs of, 321.\n\nBracts, development of, 166.\n\nBrown, Rev. J. M., opinions of, 9.\n\nBulbs, growth of, 153, 156.\n\nBuprestis, 214.\n\nButterflies, eggs of, 307.\n\nButterfly-flower, 150.\n\n\nCabbage-palm, 144.\n\nCarboniferous deposits, 44.\n\nCase-flies, 209.\n\nCassowary, 252.\n\nCaverns, bone, 76, 88.\n\nCeiba, 174.\n\nCephalaspis, 44.\n\nChalk formation, 64.\n\nChalmers, Dr., opinions of, 19.\n\nChronology of globe, 30, 339.\n\nCircularity of organic life, 113, 336, 351.\n\nClavagella, 225.\n\nCoal, age of, 50.\n  extent of, 46.\n  origin of, 47.\n\nCoccus, economy of, 315.\n\nCockburn, Rev. Sir W., opinions of, 14.\n\nCockroach, egg-case of, 318.\n\nConybeare, Dr., opinions of, 20.\n\nCoprolites, 60.\n\nCoral polypes, 40, 41, 45.\n  activity of, 86.\n\nCouch-grass, 135.\n\nCow, circular life of, 121.\n\nCowry, 231.\n\nCrab, metamorphosis of, 216.\n\nCrag and tail, 55.\n  formation, 75.\n\nCrinoids, abundance of, 58.\n\nCreation, extent of, 22.\n  fact of, 110.\n  law of, 337, 368.\n  periods of, 15.\n  What is it? 123.\n\nCribella, metamorphosis of, 321.\n\nCrocodile, 248.\n\nCuckoo-fly, egg of, 309.\n\nCumbrian formations, 36.\n\nCurrents, oceanic, 356.\n\nCuttlefish, shell of, 237.\n\nCycads, 60.\n\nCyclicism, 336, 351.\n  of the globe, 354.\n  of inorganic nature, 355.\n  of celestial orbs, 359.\n\nCysticercus, 196.\n\n\nDaphnia, economy of, 325.\n\nDauber, economy of, 320.\n\nDays of creation, 15.\n\nDeductions, fallible, 2.\n\nDeer, Irish, 84.\n\nDeltas, 85.\n\nDeposits, earthy, 87.\n\nDepressions and elevations, 81.\n\nDevelopment hypothesis, 111.\n\nDevonian formations, 42.\n\nDiachronism, 125, 346.\n\nDiatomace\u00e6 in chalk, 64.\n\nDinotherium, 72, 370.\n\nDione, 228.\n\nDisturbances of strata, 54, 66.\n\nDodo, 84.\n\nDouble cocoa-nut, 296.\n\n\nEarth-pea, germination of, 299.\n\nEchinus, 190.\n\nEggs of fowl, 328.\n  of insects, 306.\n\nElephant, dentition of, 266.\n  fossil, 73.\n\nElevations and depressions, 81.\n\nEncephalartos, 161.\n\nEuphorbia, 164.\n\nErythrina, 297.\n\n\nFairholm, Mr., opinions of, 12.\n\nFeather, growth of, 253.\n\nFeather-star, 193, 305.\n\nFig, Australian, 162.\n  Indian, 164.\n\nFishes, cycloid, 68.\n  earliest, 44.\n  sauroid, 52.\n\nFishes, scales of, 242.\n\nFoetus of kangaroo, 333.\n\nFootprints, 57.\n\nForaminifera, 64, 70.\n\nFrog, 57.\n\n\nGall-fly, egg of, 310.\n\nGanges, delta of, 85.\n\nGeography, changes of, 60, 66,70.\n\nGeology, in need of caution, 4.\n\nGerms, hypothesis of, 294.\n\nGilt-head, 241.\n\nGlaciers, theory of, 79.\n\nGladiolus, 152.\n\nGlobe, chronology of, 30.\n  cyclicism of, 354.\n  density of, 37.\n\nGnats, egg-raft of, 207.\n\nGoliathus, 205.\n\nGranite, 37.\n  decomposition and reconstruction of, 38.\n\nGrass-tree, 154.\n\nGray, Mr., opinions of, 20.\n\nGrit, 46.\n\nGulf-stream, 356.\n\nGyroceras, 371.\n\n\nHair, growth of, 278.\n\nHarris, Dr., opinions of, 19.\n\nHawkmoth, 118.\n\nHertfordshire, strata of, 33.\n\nHippopotamus, 263.\n  fossil, 73.\n\nHitchcock, Dr., opinions of, 21.\n\nHorns of ibex, 257.\n  stag, 258.\n\nHorse, 260.\n\nHyl\u00e6osaurus, 62.\n\nHypotheses, variety of, 27.\n\n\nIbex, 257.\n\nIchthyosaurus, 59.\n\nIguanodon, 62.\n\nInfusoria in chalk, 64.\n\nInsects, eggs of, 306.\n\nIriartea, 139.\n\n\nJulus, 212.\n\n\nKangaroo, foetus of, 333.\n\nKirkdale cave, 77.\n\n\nLabyrinthodon, 57.\n\nLace-fly, egg of, 311.\n\nLady-fern, 116.\n\nLaw of creation, 337, 368, 371.\n\nLeaf-scars of fern, 130.\n\nLepralia, 219.\n\nLias, 58.\n\nLight, velocity of, 360.\n\nLily, 156.\n\nLimestone coral, 45.\n\nLocust-tree. 177.\n\nLondon clay, 67.\n\nLoranthus, 169.\n\n\"_Lusus Natur\u00e6_,\" 368.\n\n\nMacbrair, Mr., opinions of, 10.\n\nMadrepore, 183.\n\nMammal, earliest, 63.\n\nMammoth, 73.\n\nMan, introduction of, 83.\n  structure of, 275.\n\nMangrove, 173.\n  germination of, 301.\n\nMarsupials, 82.\n\nMastodon, 73.\n\nMedusa, 188, 304.\n\nMegalosaurus, 61.\n\nMelicerta, 210.\n\nMiller, Hugh, opinions of, 15.\n\nMillepore, 183.\n\nMoa, 84.\n\nMoho, 84.\n\nMoon, cyclicism of, 359.\n\nMosasaurus, 65.\n\nMoth, eggs of, 314.\n\nMountains, upheaving of, 66, 70.\n\nMurex, 233, 365.\n\n\nNails, growth of, 277.\n\nNature, circularity of, 113.\n  plan of, 345, 369.\n\nNautilus, 235.\n\nNavel, evidence from, 289, 334.\n\nNerita, axis of, 365.\n\nNoah's flood, 6.\n\n\nOestrid\u00e6, economy of, 309.\n\nOolitic system, 58, 60;\n  duration of, 63.\n\nOpossum, 63.\n\nOrgan-pipe, 185.\n\nOrganic life a circle, 113, 122.\n\nOrganisms, earliest, 40.\n\nOrchis, 152.\n\n\nPalm-leaf, young, 145.\n\nPenn, Mr., opinions of, 11.\n\nPhenomena, evidence of, delusive, 337.\n\nPlants of London clay, 67.\n\n\"Plastic power,\" 368.\n\nPlates of tortoise, 250.\n\nPlesiosaurus, 59.\n\nPlumularia, 119.\n\nPowell, Professor, opinions of, 26.\n\nPrickly pear, 172.\n\nProchronism, 125, 346, 368.\n  dependent on cyclicism, 354.\n\n\"Protoplast,\" opinions of, 23.\n\nPterodactyle, 62, 370.\n\n\nRaindrops, 58.\n\nRattan, 145.\n\nRattlesnake, 247.\n\nReptiles, Marine, 16, 59.\n\nRhinoceros, fossil, 73.\n\nRoots, aerial, of fig, 163.\n  of iriartea, 139.\n  of mangrove, 173.\n  of pandanus, 138.\n\nRotifera, viviparous, 322.\n\n\nSackcloth of palms, 141.\n\nSandstone, age of, 50.\n  new red, 56.\n  old red, 42.\n\nSaw-fly, eggs of, 317.\n\nScale of fish, 242.\n\nScarlet-runner, economy of, 113.\n\nScrew-pine, 136.\n\nScripture, efforts to reconcile with geology, 5.\n  literal sense of, 4.\n\nSea-urchin, 191, 305.\n\nSea-pen, 182.\n\nSecondary epoch, 66.\n\nSedgwick, Professor, on past time, 98.\n  opinions of, 17.\n\nSelaginella, 133.\n\nSenses, evidence of, 1.\n\nSerpent, earliest, 68.\n\nSerpula, 198, 305.\n\nSharks, 52, 58, 243.\n  egg of, 326.\n\nShells, now fossilizing, 89.\n\nShore-crab, 216.\n\nSilk-cotton tree, 174.\n\nSilurian formations, 40.\n\nSkeleton, human, 286.\n\nSkeletons, evidence from, 105, 340.\n\nSloths, fossil, 82.\n\nSmith, Dr. Pye, opinions of, 22.\n\nSmithia, elegance of, 371.\n\nSpecies, persistence of, 110.\n\nSpider, eggs of, 313.\n\nStag, 258.\n\nStar-fish, madreporic plate of, 366.\n\nStars, light from fixed, 361.\n\nStature of man, 284.\n\nStrata, disturbances of, 54.\n  number of, 37.\n\nStrombus, 230.\n\nSugar-palm, 141.\n\nSumner, Dr., opinions of, 19.\n\nSurinam toad, 327.\n\nSword-fish, 240.\n\n\nTapeworm, 195.\n\nTapir, 69.\n\nTeeth of babiroussa, 262.\n\nTeeth of crocodile, 249.\n  elephant, 268.\n  hippopotamus, 263.\n  horse, 261.\n  man, 281, 285.\n  shark, 243.\n\nTermes, 203.\n\nTerebella, 201.\n\nTertiary epoch, 66.\n  fauna, 76.\n\nTestimony, divine, 2;\n  dear to many scientific men, 5;\n  by some rejected, 8.\n\nTestudinaria, 158.\n\nThames Tunnel, strata of, 32.\n\nThyroid cartilage, 284.\n\nTimber, rings of, 178, 342, 349.\n\nTortoise, 250.\n\nTour of inspection, 127.\n\nTraveller's tree, 148.\n\nTree-fern, age of, 128.\n\nTree-frog, 246.\n\nTrilobites, 41.\n\nTruth, value of, 7.\n\nTulip, seed of, 298.\n\nTulip-tree, 165.\n\nTurner, Sharon, opinions of, 18.\n\nTusk of elephant, 266.\n\n\nUre, Dr., opinions of, 10.\n\n\nVenus, prickly, 228.\n\n\"Vestiges,\" hypothesis of, 27, 111.\n\nVolcanic action, 55, 66, 86.\n\n\nWeevil, economy of, 308.\n\nWhalebone, 255.\n\nWhite ant, 203.\n\nWorld, projected history of, 351.\n\n\nYorkshire, strata of, 33.\n\nYoung, Dr., opinions of, 13.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[1] Dr. Lardner; Museum of Science and Art, vol. i. p. 81.\n\n[2] As Cuvier, Buckland, and many others. On the question whether the\nphenomena of Geology can be comprised within the short period formerly\nassigned to them, the Rev. Samuel Charles Wilts long ago observed:\n\"Buckland, Sedgwick, Faber, Chalmers, Conybeare, and many other\nChristian geologists, strove long with themselves to believe that they\ncould: and they did not give up the hope, or seek for a new\ninterpretation of the sacred text, till they considered themselves\ndriven from their position by such facts as we have stated. If, _even\nnow, a reasonable, or we might say_ POSSIBLE _solution were offered,\nthey would_, we feel persuaded, _gladly revert_ to their original\nopinion.\"--_Christian Observer_, August, 1834.\n\n[3] Reflections on Geology.\n\n[4] Geology and Geologists.\n\n[5] New System of Geology.\n\n[6] Mineral and Mosaic Geologies, p. 430.\n\n[7] Geology of Scripture.\n\n[8] Scriptural Geology, _passim._\n\n[9] Letter to Buckland, 15, _et seq._\n\n[10] Origen, Augustine, &c.\n\n[11] Testimony of the Rocks, p. 144\n\n[12] Discourse (5th Ed.), 115.\n\n[13] Sac. Hist. of World.\n\n[14] Rec. of Creation.\n\n[15] Nat. Theology.\n\n[16] Pre-Adamite Earth.\n\n[17] Harmony of Scripture and Geology.\n\n[18] Christian Observer, 1834.\n\n[19] Religion of Geology, Lect. ii.\n\n[20] Scripture and Geology.\n\n[21] I am not _replying_ to any of these conflicting opinions; else,\nwith respect to this one, I might consider it sufficient to adduce the\n_ipsissima verba_ of the inspired text. Not a word is said of Adam's\nbeing \"nine hundred and thirty years _old_;\" the plain statement is as\nfollows:--\"And _all the days that Adam lived_ were nine hundred and\nthirty years.\" (Gen. v. 5.)\n\n[22] \"Protoplast,\" pp. 58, 59; p. 325; 2d. Ed.\n\n[23] Unity of Worlds (1856), pp. 488, 493.\n\n[24] \"A geological truth must command our assent as powerfully as that\nof the existence of our own minds, or of the Deity himself; and any\nrevelation which stands opposed to such truths _must be false_. The\ngeologist has therefore _nothing to do with revealed religion_ in his\nscientific inquiries.\"--_Edinb. Review_, xv. 16.\n\n[25] Ansted's Ancient World, 18.\n\n[26] Ansted's Ancient World, 30.\n\n[27] Scripture and Geology, 371. (Ed. 1855.)\n\n[28] \"It is by no means unlikely that some beds of coal were derived\nfrom the mass of vegetable matter present at one time on the surface,\nand submerged suddenly. It is only necessary to refer to the accounts of\nvegetation in some of the extremely moist, warm islands in the southern\nhemisphere, where the ground is occasionally covered with eight or ten\nfeet of decaying vegetable matter at one time, to be satisfied that this\nis at least possible.\"\n\n[29] Ansted's Anc. World, 75.\n\n[30] M'Culloch's System of Geology, i. 506.\n\n[31] Origin of Coal.\n\n[32] Testimony of the Rocks, p. 78.\n\n[33] Mr. Newman suggests that they were \"marsupial bats\" (Zoologist, p.\n129). I have adopted his attitudes, but have not ventured to give them\nmammalian ears.\n\n[34] In Tennant's \"List of Brit. Fossils\" (1847), but two species--a\nBrachiopod and a Gastropod--are mentioned as common to the Chalk and the\nLondon Clay. They are _Terebratula striatula_, and _Pyrula Smithii_.\n\n[35] Ansted's Anc. World, 267.\n\n[36] Reliqui\u00e6 Diluvian\u00e6.\n\n[37] Travels through the Alps, p. 19.\n\n[38] Prof. Owen, in his admirable account of the _Mylodon_, has\nmentioned a fact which brings us very vividly into contact with its\npersonal history. He shows that the animal got its living by overturning\nvast trees, doing the work by main strength, and feeding on the leaves.\nThe fall of the tree might occasionally put the animal in peril; and in\nthe specimen examined there is proof of such danger having been\nincurred. The skull had undergone two fractures during the life of the\nanimal, one of which was entirely healed, and the other partially. The\nformer exhibits the outer tables of bone broken by a fracture four\ninches long, near the orbit. The other is more extensive, and behind,\nbeing five inches long, and three broad, and over the brain. The inner\nplate had in both these cases defended the brain from any serious\ninjury, and the animal seems to have been recovering from the latter\naccident at the time of its death.\n\n[39] Naturalist's Voyage, _passim_.\n\n[40] The Indians of North America knew that the Mastodon had a trunk; a\nfact which (though the anatomist infers it from the bones of the skull)\nit is difficult to imagine them to be acquainted with, except by\ntradition from those who had seen the living animal.\n\n[41] Ansted; Phys. Geography, 82.\n\n[42] An interesting fact relating to the Brazilian caves was\ncommunicated to Dr. Mantell. \"M. Claussen, in the course of his\nresearches, discovered a cavern, the stalagmite floor of which was\nentire. On penetrating the sparry crust, he found the usual ossiferous\nbed; but pressing engagements compelled him to leave the deposit\nunexplored. After an interval of some years, M. Claussen again visited\nthe cavern, and found the excavation he had made completely filled up\nwith stalagmite, the floor being as entire as on his first entrance. On\nbreaking through this newly-formed incrustation, it was found to be\ndistinctly marked with lines of dark-coloured sediment, alternating with\nthe crystalline stalactite. Reasoning on the probable cause of this\nappearance, M. Claussen sagaciously concluded that it arose from the\nalternation of the wet and dry seasons. During the drought of summer,\nthe sand and dust of the parched land were wafted into the caves and\nfissures, and this earthy layer was covered during the rainy season by\nstalagmite, from the water that percolated through the limestone, and\ndeposited calc-spar on the floor. The number of alternate layers of spar\nand sediment tallied with the years that had elapsed since his first\nvisit; and on breaking up the ancient bed of stalagmite, he found the\nsame natural register of the annual variations of the seasons; every\nlayer dug through presented a uniform alternation of sediment and spar;\nand as the botanist ascertains the age of an ancient dicotyledonous tree\nfrom the annual circles of growth, in like manner the geologist\nattempted to calculate the period that had elapsed since the\ncommencement of these ossiferous deposits of the cave; and although the\ninference, from want of time and means to conduct the inquiry with\nprecision, can only be accepted as a rough calculation, yet it is\ninteresting to learn that the time indicated by this natural\nchronometer, since the extinct mammalian forms were interred, amounted\nto many thousand years.\"--(_Petrifactions and their Teachings_, p. 481.)\n\n[43] Biblioth\u00e8que Univers., March, 1852.\n\n[44] \"It is now admitted by all competent persons, that the formation\neven of those strata which are _nearest the surface_, must have occupied\nvast periods, probably millions of years, in arriving at their present\nstate.\"--BABBAGE, _Ninth Bridgewater Treatise_, p. 67.\n\n[45] Geology of Central France.\n\n[46] \"Though perfect knowledge is not possessed, yet there are reasons\nfor believing that the duration of life to testacean individuals of the\npresent race is several years. But who can state the _proportion_ which\nthe average length of life to the individual mollusc or conchifer, bears\nto the duration appointed by the Creator to the species? Take any one of\nthe six or seven thousand known recent species; let it be a _Buccinum_,\nof which 120 species are ascertained, (one of which is the commonly\nknown _whelk_;) or a _Cypr\u00e6a_, comprising about as many, (a well-known\nspecies is on almost every mantel-piece, the _tiger-cowry_;) or an\n_Ostrea_ (_oyster_), of which 130 species are described. We have reason\nto think that the individuals have a natural life of at least six or\nseven years; but we have no reason to suppose that any one species has\ndied out, since the Adamic creation. May we then, for the sake of an\nillustrative argument, take the duration of testacean species, one with\nanother, at one thousand times the life of the individual? May we say\nsix thousand years? We are dealing very liberally with our opponents.\nYet in examining the vertical evidences of the cessations of the fossil\nspecies, marks are found of an entire change in the forms of animal\nlife; we find such cessations and changes to have occurred MANY times in\nthe thickness of but a few hundred feet of these late-rocks.\"--DR. J.\nPYE SMITH, _Scripture and Geology_, 5th Ed. p. 376.\n\n[47] \"One of the laminated formations [in Auvergne] may be said to\nfurnish a chronometer for itself. It consists of sixty feet of siliceous\nand calcareous deposits, each as thin as pasteboard, and bearing upon\ntheir separating surfaces the stems and seed-vessels of small\nwater-plants in infinite numbers; and countless multitudes of minute\nshells, resembling some species of our common snail-shells. These layers\nhave been formed with evident regularity, and to each of them we may\nreasonably assign the term of one season, that is a year. Now thirty of\nsuch layers frequently do not exceed one inch in thickness. Let us\naverage them at twenty-five. The thickness of the stratum is at least\nsixty feet; and thus we gain, for the whole of this formation alone,\neighteen thousand years.\"--DR. J. P. SMITH, _Scripture and Geology_, 5th\nEdition, p. 137.\n\n[48] \"This fact has now been verified in almost all parts of the globe,\nand has led to a conviction that at successive periods of the past the\nsame area of land and water has been inhabited by species of animals and\nplants as distinct as those which now people the antipodes, or which now\nco-exist in the arctic, temperate, and tropical zones. It appears that\nfrom the remotest periods there has been ever a coming in of new organic\nforms, and an extinction of those which pre-existed on the earth; some\nspecies having endured for a longer, others for a shorter time; but none\nhaving ever re-appeared, after once dying out.\"--LYELL'S _Elements of\nGeology_, p. 275.\n\n[49] J. Pye Smith, Scripture and Geology, 5th Ed., p. 69.\n\n[50] In Dr. Pye Smith's Scripture and Geology, p. 382, (Ed. 1855.)\n\n[51] I would venture respectfully to suggest that the following argument\nby Mr. Babbage is vitiated throughout by a confounding of the phenomena\nobserved with the conclusions inferred from them.\n\n     \"What, then, have those accomplished, who have restricted\n     the Mosaic account of the creation to that diminutive\n     period, which is, as it were, but a span in the duration of\n     the earth's existence, and who have imprudently rejected\n     _the testimony of the senses_, when opposed to their\n     philological criticisms? The very arguments which\n     Protestants have opposed to the doctrine of\n     transubstantiation, would, if their view of the case were\n     correct, be equally irresistible against the Book of\n     Genesis. But let us consider what would be the conclusion of\n     any reasonable being in a parallel case. Let us imagine a\n     manuscript written three thousand years ago, and professing\n     to be a revelation from the Deity, in which it was stated\n     that the colour of the paper of the very book now in the\n     reader's hands is _black_, and that the colour of the ink in\n     the characters which he is now reading is _white_. With that\n     reasonable doubt of his own individual faculties which would\n     become the inquirer into the truth of a statement said to be\n     derived from so high an origin, he would ask all those\n     around him, whether to their senses the paper appeared to be\n     _black_, and the ink to be _white_. If he found the senses\n     of other individuals agree with his own, then he would\n     undoubtedly pronounce the alleged revelation a forgery, and\n     those who propounded it to be either deceived or\n     deceivers.\"--_Ninth Bridgewater Treatise_, p. 68.\n\n[52] Dr. Pye Smith calls the hypothesis of progressive development \"the\ncrude impertinence of a few foreign sophists,\"--and he states as a fact,\n\"that all the great geologists repudiate such a notion with abhorrence,\nand give physical evidence of its falsehood.\"--_Scripture and Geology_,\n(5th Ed.) p. 420. See also Professor Owen in \"Rep. Brit Assoc.\" 1842;\nProfessor Sedgwick, in \"Discourse on Stud. of Camb.;\" Professor Whewell,\nin \"Hist. of Inductive Sciences;\" Professor Ansted, in \"Anc. World;\" &c.\n\n[53] Wallace's \"Palms of the Amazon,\" p. 35.\n\n[54] Roxburgh.\n\n[55] Rumph, v. 100.\n\n[56] My observations rest on the fine specimen of this plant preserved\nin the British Museum. Dr. Harvey, however, says, \"The growth of the\ntrunk in _Kingia_ is very slow, and a specimen about ten feet high may\nprobably be some hundreds of years old.\" Report of Dubl. Univ. Zool. and\nBot. Assoc. for Feb. 25, 1857. See the note _infra_ on page 188.\n\n[57] Gaudichaud: Recherches G\u00e9n. sur l'Organographie, p. 129.\n\n[58] On the development of _Loranthus_, &c. Linn. Tr. xviii p. 71,\n(_abridged_).\n\n[59] \"Each and every plant is at first a cell.\"--\"New cells can never be\nformed externally to, but only within, other cells already formed.\" (A.\nBraun, on the Veg. Indiv.)\n\n\"The process of the propagation of cells, by the formation of new cells\nin their interior, is an universal law in the vegetable kingdom.\"\n(Schleiden; Grundz\u00fcge).\n\n\"Cell-formation in plants takes place only in the cavities of older\ncells.\" (Mohl, on the Veg. Cell)\n\n[60] See Von Martius, on the Brazilian Locusts.\n\n[61] The origin of coral-stocks is minutely described by Ehrenberg, in\nthe Abhandl. for 1832, where he makes the following remarks:--\"The coral\nmass is neither a mere structure composed of many animals arbitrarily\nconjoined, as Ellis supposed; nor one single animal with many heads, or\nwith simple furcations, as Cavolini maintained; nor a vegetable stem\nwith animal flowers, as Linn\u00e6us expressed it; it is a body of families,\na _living_ tree of consanguinity; the single animals belonging to it,\nand continually developing _upon the primary ancestor_, are entirely\nisolated within themselves, and capable of complete independence,\n_although unable to achieve it_.\"\n\n[62] This is not quite in accord with Lamouroux's account; but it is\nmore consistent with what we know of polype-growth.\n\n[63] We lack precise data on which to found conclusions as to the actual\nrate of growth of many animals. Sir John Dalyell's famous Actinia, now\nin the possession of Dr. Fleming, affords us a proof that the Zoophytes\nare long-lived, and slow in attaining maturity. It will be readily seen,\nhowever, that the argument in the text does not depend on the actual\nperiod evolved. The lapse of _a_ period of time, no matter how long, is\nthe only essential point.\n\n[64] \"All the component cells of any one organism may be considered as\nthe descendants of the primordial cell in which it originated.\" (_Dr.\nCarpenter_; Comp. Physiol.; p. 396. 4th Ed.)\n\n[65] I conclude so; because I have kept specimens of _Echinus_, not full\ngrown, in healthy condition, for nearly a year, without any perceptible\nincrease in their dimensions.\n\n[66] I am not aware that this stage of the Entozoon has been actually\nobserved; but from what we know of its previous and subsequent history,\nthe correctness of the statement in the text will scarcely be disputed.\n(See Prof. Owen: Comp. Anat. of Inverteb. Ed. 2. p. 74.)\n\n[67] See Notes to \"Marmion.\"\n\n[68] Report on Brit. Annelida, p. 194.\n\n[69] We have no direct observations, that I am aware of, on the larval\nstate of the African _Goliathi_; but their near ally, the _Cetonia\naurata_ of Europe, passes four years in the grub condition, as does also\nthe _Melolontha vulgaris_, another lamellicorn beetle. The _Lucanus\ncervus_, or Stag-beetle, continues a larva for six years.\n\n[70] Fabre; Ann. d. Sci. Nat.; iii. 1855.\n\n[71] _B. splendida_, has been ascertained to have existed, as an inmate\nof the wood of a table, for _more than twenty_ years. (Linn. Trans.; x.\n399.)\n\n[72] The rate of increase in dimensions shown by specimens of this\nspecies, now so frequently kept in Aquaria, warrants this assertion;\nthough _how many_ years a Crab takes to attain adult size, no exact\nobservations, so far as I know, testify.\n\n[73] The exuvia of the cirri are sloughed from the _Balanid\u00e6_ about\nevery week in summer; and perhaps this process is coetaneous with an\naddition to the valves.\n\n[74] Mr. Broderip supposes it to have had the power of swimming freely,\nand of seeking its future habitation, _as a bivalve_; but Lov\u00e8n had not\nthen made known to us the embryogeny and metamorphosis of the\n_Conchifera_. It is much more probable that the case is as I have\nventured to assume in the text.\n\n[75] Bennett.\n\n[76] Rumphius.\n\n[77] The periodical formation of these septa in the progress of growth,\nis analogous to that of the projecting external plates in the\nWendletrap, and of the rows of spines in the _Murex_; but those external\nprocesses consist of the opake calcareous layer of the shell, whilst the\ninternal processes in the _Nautilus_ consist of the nacreous layer, like\nthe septa in the _Turritella_. Thus the embryo _Nautilus_ at first\ninhabits a simple shell, like that of most univalve Mollusca, and\nmanifests, according to the usual law, the general type at the early\nstage of its existence; although it soon begins, and apparently before\nhaving quitted the ovum, to take on the special form.--Prof. Owen's\n_Lect. on Invertebrate Anim._ p. 593, 2d Ed.\n\n[78] Woodward's \"Manual of the Mollusca,\" p. 83.\n\n[79] Carpenter, on the Microscope, &c., p. 602.\n\n[80] Grant's Comp. Anat., 53.\n\n[81] See Jones's General Outline, p. 506. (Ed. 1841.)\n\n[82] Such is the common statement. Dr. Harlan, however, observes that\n\"the rattle is cast annually [with the sloughed skin], and,\n_consequently_, no inference as to the age of the animal can be drawn\nfrom the number of pieces which compose the rattles.\" (_Journ. Acad.\nNat. Sci._; v. 368.) I confess this appears to me to be a _non\nsequitur_; for is it not quite possible that one may be added to the\n_number_ annually, without involving the actual perpetuity of the\npreceding ones? It is evident that the increase must take place at some\ntime or other, and it seems to me more likely to occur at the sloughing\nof the skin, that is, annually, than either oftener or seldomer.\n\n[83] Martin \"On the Horse,\" p. 111.\n\n[84] Professor Owen's \"Odontography:\"--to which splendid work I am\nindebted, for the engravings of these skulls.\n\n[85] Brewster's Edinburgh Encyclop\u00e6dia.\n\n[86] Owen's Odontogr. p. 631.\n\n[87] Penny Cyclop\u00e6dia; _art._ BONE.\n\n[88] Dr. Carpenter's Human Physiol. p. 916. (Ed. 1855.)\n\n[89] Sir Thomas Browne, indeed, denies Adam a navel; I presume, however,\nphysiologists will rather take my view. Sir Thomas did not know that the\nprochronism which he thought absurd pervaded every part of organic\nstructure. The following is his verdict:--\n\n\"Another Mistake there may be in the Picture of our first Parents, who\nafter the manner of theyre Posteritie are bothe delineated with a\nNavill: and this is observable not only in ordinarie and stayned peeces,\nbut in the Authenticke Draughts of Vrbin, Angelo, and others. Which,\nnotwythstandynge, cannot be allowed, except wee impute that vnto the\nfirst Cause, which we impose not on the second; or what wee deny vnto\nNature, wee impute vnto Naturity it selfe; that is, that in the first\nand moste accomplyshed Peece, the Creator affected Superfluities, or\nordayned Parts withoute all Vse or Offyce.\"--_Pseudodoxia Epidemica_,\nlib. v.; cap. v.\n\n[90] Blackwood, in an excellent article on Johnston's _Physical\nGeography_ (April, 1849), says:--\"Adam _must_ have been created in the\nfull possession of manhood; for if he had been formed an infant, he must\nhave perished through mere helplessness. When God looked on this world,\nand pronounced all to be 'very good,'--which implies the completion of\nhis purpose, and the perfection of his work--is it possible to conceive\nthat he looked only on the germs of production, on plains covered with\neggs, or seas filled with spawn, or forests still buried in the capsules\nof seeds; on a creation utterly shapeless, lifeless and silent, instead\nof the myriads of delighted existence, all enjoying the first sense of\nbeing?\"\n\nAnd an eminent Geologist considers the position indisputable, as regards\nman:--\"To the slightest rational consideration it must be evident, that\nthe first human pair were created in the perfection of their bodily\norgans and mental powers.\"--(Dr. J. P. Smith; \"Script. and Geol.;\" 219.)\n\n[91] Gen. i. 12, 21, 26, 27.\n\n[92] Penny Cyclop.; _art._ ARACHIS.\n\n[93] Linn. Trans. iii. 23.\n\n[94] Introd. to Entom.; Lett. xi. \u00a7 2.\n\n[95] Jones; Nat. Hist. Anim.; ii. 151.\n\n[96] Cf. Mr. Lubbock (Proc. Roy. Soc. viii. 354), with Dr. Baird (Brit\nEntomostr. p. 82).\n\n[97] Dr. Carpenter: Comp. Phys.; p. 615.\n\n[98] Dr. Alex. Braun, \"On the Veget. Individual.\" (Ann. N. H. Nov.\n1855.)\n\n[99] It may be objected that _Elephas primigenius_ is absolutely\ndistinct from _E. Indicus_. I answer, Yes, _specifically_ distinct; and\nso am I distinct from my father,--_individually_ distinct. But as\nindividual distinctness does not preclude the individual from being the\nexponent of a circular revolution in the life-history of the species, so\nspecific distinctness may not preclude the species from being the\nexponent of a circular revolution in some higher, unnamed, life-history.\n\n[100] \"We may assert of the individual, as well as of the species, that\nit completes the cycle of its existence in a succession of subordinate\ngenerations; while, on the other hand, we may affirm of the species,\nthat, like the individual, it exhibits a determinate cycle of\ndevelopment.\" \"The species itself may be regarded as an inferior\n'momentum' of a still more comprehensive cycle of development.\"--_Dr. A.\nBraun_, \"_On the Vegetable Individual._\"\n\n\"The species is an individual of a higher rank.\"--_Link: Elements of\nBotanical Science_, vi. 11.\n\n\"Species, like individuals, have a certain limited term of existence. It\nis the fact, that, _according to some general law_, species of animals\nare introduced, last for a limited period, and are then succeeded by\nothers performing the same office.\"--_Ansted's Ancient World_, 52, 54.\n\n[101] \"The unity of the plan of organization, and the regular succession\nof animal forms, point out a _beginning_ of this great kingdom on the\nsurface of our globe, although the earliest stages of its development\nmay now be effaced: and the continuity of the series though all\ngeological epochs, and the _gradual transitions_ which _connect_ the\nspecies of one formation with those of the next in succession,\ndistinctly indicate that they form _the parts of one creation_, and not\nthe heterogeneous remnants of successive kingdoms begun and destroyed:\nso that, while they present the best records of the changes which the\nsurface of the globe has undergone, they likewise afford the best\ntestimony of the recent origin of the present crust of our planet, and\nof all its organic inhabitants.\"--_Dr. Grant, in Br. Sci. Annual for\n1839._\n\n[102] Dr. Harris has the following observations:--\n\n\"Why might not God have created the crust of the earth, just as it is,\nwith all its numberless stratifications, and diversified formations,\ncomplete? And the analogy for such an exercise of creative power is\nsupposed to be found in the creation of Adam, not as an infant, but as\n_an adult_; and in the production of the _full-sized_ trees of Eden. To\nwhich the reply is direct: the maturity of the first man, and of the\nobjects around him, could not deceive him by implying that they had\nslowly grown to that state. His first knowledge was the knowledge of the\ncontrary. He lived, partly, in order to proclaim the fact of his\ncreation. And, could his own body, or any of the objects created at the\nsame time, have been subjected to a physiological examination, they\nwould, no doubt, have been found to indicate their miraculous production\nin their very destitution of all the traces of an early growth; whereas\nthe shell of the earth is a crowded storehouse of evidence of its\ngradual formation. So that the question, expressed in other language,\namounts to this: Might not the God of infinite truth have enclosed in\nthe earth, at its creation, evidence of its having existed ages before\nits actual production? Of course, the objector would disavow such a\nsentiment. But such appears to be the real import of the objection; and,\nas such, it involves its own refutation.\"--_Pre-Adamite Earth_, p. 83.\n\nNow this reasoning appeared, doubtless, very triumphant to the worthy\nDoctor: and yet a very little acquaintance with physiology would have\ntaught him that he was enunciating an absurdity. The very supposition\nwhich he considers as self-refuting, is an indubitable physiological\nfact. I have abundantly shown, in the text, that the _cells which\ncompose_ the tree or the animal are as undeniable evidences of past\nprocesses as the concentric cylinders of timber, or the superposed\nlayers of bone and scale.\n\n[103] I here assume the life-history of the globe to be represented by a\nstraight line, because I cannot _prove_ it to be a circle. I cannot even\n_imagine_ its circularity. I do not mean the possibility;--I can imagine\n_that_: but the _mode_ I cannot conceive. This, however, does not\ndisprove the possibility. If man's science extended not beyond the\naccumulated observations of his own life, he would probably be quite\nincompetent to conceive how the life-history of such a tree as the Oak\ncould be a circle; if he had never seen more than one individual, which\nwas a tree when he was born, and continued to flourish till his death.\n\n[104] The existence of Coprolites--the fossilized excrement of\nanimals--has been considered a more than ordinarily triumphant proof of\nreal pre-existence. Would it not be closely parallel with the presence\nof f\u00e6ces in the intestines of an animal at the moment of creation? Yet\nthis appears to me demonstrable. It may seem at first sight ridiculous,\nand will probably be represented so; but truth is truth. I have already\nproved that blood must have been in the arteries and veins of the\nnewly-created Man (_vide_ p. 276, _supra_), and that blood presupposes\nchyle and chyme; but what became of the indigestible residuum of the\nchyme, when the chyle was separated from it? Would it not, as a matter\nof course, be found in the intestines? If the principle is true, that\nthe created organism was exactly what it would have been had it reached\nthat condition by the ordinary course of nature, then f\u00e6cal residua must\nhave been in the intestines as certainly as chyle in the lacteals, or\nblood in the capillaries.\n\n[105] _Blackwood_; April, 1849; p. 412.\n\n[106] Strictly speaking, the current is a lagging behind of the water,\nwhich cannot keep pace with the speed communicated to the solid crust of\nthe globe at its equatorial regions. The trade-wind is owing to the same\ncause.\n\n[107] Philos. Trans. for 1802; p. 498.\n\n[108] Beitrage, p. 152.\n\n[109] Dr. A. Braun, On the Veg. Indiv.\n\n[110] See _ante_, p. 233.\n\n[111] Fauna Littor. Norveg.; i. 47.\n\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nMARINE\n\nNATURAL HISTORY CLASS.\n\n\nIn the summer of 1855, I met, at Ilfracombe, on the coast of North\nDevon, a small party of ladies and gentlemen, who formed themselves into\na Class for the study of Marine Natural History. There was much to be\ndone in the way of collecting, much to be learned in the way of study.\nNot a few species of interest, and some rarities, fell under our notice,\nscattered as we were over the rocks, and peeping into the pools, almost\nevery day for a month. Then the prizes were to be brought home, and kept\nin little Aquariums for the study of their habits, their beauties to be\ninvestigated by the pocket-lens, and the minuter kinds to be examined\nunder the microscope. An hour or two was spent on the shore every day on\nwhich the tide and the weather were suitable; and, when otherwise, the\noccupation was varied by an indoors' lesson, on identifying and\ncomparing the characters of the animals obtained, the specimens\nthemselves affording illustrations. Thus the two great desiderata of\nyoung naturalists were attained simultaneously; they learned at the same\ntime how to collect, and how to determine the names and the zoological\nrelations of the specimens when found.\n\nA little also was effected in the way of dredging the sea-bottom, and in\nsurface-fishing for Medus\u00e6, &c.; but our chief attention was directed to\nshore-collecting. Altogether, the experiment was found so agreeable,\nthat I propose to repeat it by forming a similar party every year, if\nspared, at some suitable part of the coast.\n\nSuch ladies or gentlemen as may wish to join the Class should give in\ntheir names to me, early in the summer; and any preliminary inquiries\nabout plans, terms, &c. shall meet the requisite attention.\n\nP. H. GOSSE.\n\n\nMARYCHURCH, TORQUAY,\n_Oct. 1857_.","title":"Omphalos : $b an attempt to untie the geological knot","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":74107}