Part 43

J. Pye Smith, Scripture and Geology, 5th Ed., p. 69.

In Dr. Pye Smith's Scripture and Geology, p. 382, (Ed. 1855.)

I would venture respectfully to suggest that the following argument by Mr. Babbage is vitiated throughout by a confounding of the phenomena observed with the conclusions inferred from them.

"What, then, have those accomplished, who have restricted the Mosaic account of the creation to that diminutive period, which is, as it were, but a span in the duration of the earth's existence, and who have imprudently rejected the testimony of the senses, when opposed to their philological criticisms? The very arguments which Protestants have opposed to the doctrine of transubstantiation, would, if their view of the case were correct, be equally irresistible against the Book of Genesis. But let us consider what would be the conclusion of any reasonable being in a parallel case. Let us imagine a manuscript written three thousand years ago, and professing to be a revelation from the Deity, in which it was stated that the colour of the paper of the very book now in the reader's hands is black, and that the colour of the ink in the characters which he is now reading is white. With that reasonable doubt of his own individual faculties which would become the inquirer into the truth of a statement said to be derived from so high an origin, he would ask all those around him, whether to their senses the paper appeared to be black, and the ink to be white. If he found the senses of other individuals agree with his own, then he would undoubtedly pronounce the alleged revelation a forgery, and those who propounded it to be either deceived or deceivers."--Ninth Bridgewater Treatise, p. 68.

Dr. Pye Smith calls the hypothesis of progressive development "the crude impertinence of a few foreign sophists,"--and he states as a fact, "that all the great geologists repudiate such a notion with abhorrence, and give physical evidence of its falsehood."--Scripture and Geology, (5th Ed.) p. 420. See also Professor Owen in "Rep. Brit Assoc." 1842; Professor Sedgwick, in "Discourse on Stud. of Camb.;" Professor Whewell, in "Hist. of Inductive Sciences;" Professor Ansted, in "Anc. World;" &c.

Wallace's "Palms of the Amazon," p. 35.

Roxburgh.

Rumph, v. 100.

My observations rest on the fine specimen of this plant preserved in the British Museum. Dr. Harvey, however, says, "The growth of the trunk in Kingia is very slow, and a specimen about ten feet high may probably be some hundreds of years old." Report of Dubl. Univ. Zool. and Bot. Assoc. for Feb. 25, 1857. See the note infra on page 188.

Gaudichaud: Recherches Gen. sur l'Organographie, p. 129.

On the development of Loranthus, &c. Linn. Tr. xviii p. 71, (abridged).

"Each and every plant is at first a cell."--"New cells can never be formed externally to, but only within, other cells already formed." (A. Braun, on the Veg. Indiv.)

"The process of the propagation of cells, by the formation of new cells in their interior, is an universal law in the vegetable kingdom." (Schleiden; Grundzuege).

"Cell-formation in plants takes place only in the cavities of older cells." (Mohl, on the Veg. Cell)

See Von Martius, on the Brazilian Locusts.

The origin of coral-stocks is minutely described by Ehrenberg, in the Abhandl. for 1832, where he makes the following remarks:--"The coral mass is neither a mere structure composed of many animals arbitrarily conjoined, as Ellis supposed; nor one single animal with many heads, or with simple furcations, as Cavolini maintained; nor a vegetable stem with animal flowers, as Linnaeus expressed it; it is a body of families, a living tree of consanguinity; the single animals belonging to it, and continually developing upon the primary ancestor, are entirely isolated within themselves, and capable of complete independence, although unable to achieve it."

This is not quite in accord with Lamouroux's account; but it is more consistent with what we know of polype-growth.

We lack precise data on which to found conclusions as to the actual rate of growth of many animals. Sir John Dalyell's famous Actinia, now in the possession of Dr. Fleming, affords us a proof that the Zoophytes are long-lived, and slow in attaining maturity. It will be readily seen, however, that the argument in the text does not depend on the actual period evolved. The lapse of a period of time, no matter how long, is the only essential point.

"All the component cells of any one organism may be considered as the descendants of the primordial cell in which it originated." (Dr. Carpenter; Comp. Physiol.; p. 396. 4th Ed.)

I conclude so; because I have kept specimens of Echinus, not full grown, in healthy condition, for nearly a year, without any perceptible increase in their dimensions.

I am not aware that this stage of the Entozoon has been actually observed; but from what we know of its previous and subsequent history, the correctness of the statement in the text will scarcely be disputed. (See Prof. Owen: Comp. Anat. of Inverteb. Ed. 2. p. 74.)

See Notes to "Marmion."

Report on Brit. Annelida, p. 194.

We have no direct observations, that I am aware of, on the larval state of the African Goliathi; but their near ally, the Cetonia aurata of Europe, passes four years in the grub condition, as does also the Melolontha vulgaris, another lamellicorn beetle. The Lucanus cervus, or Stag-beetle, continues a larva for six years.

Fabre; Ann. d. Sci. Nat.; iii. 1855.

B. splendida, has been ascertained to have existed, as an inmate of the wood of a table, for more than twenty years. (Linn. Trans.; x. 399.)

The rate of increase in dimensions shown by specimens of this species, now so frequently kept in Aquaria, warrants this assertion; though how many years a Crab takes to attain adult size, no exact observations, so far as I know, testify.

The exuvia of the cirri are sloughed from the Balanidae about every week in summer; and perhaps this process is coetaneous with an addition to the valves.