UC-NRLF
B 3 272 D33
v
SIRKfcLEY \
LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF
CALIFORNIA /
akwctence A Na*jr
STUDIES
ANIMAL LIFE
GEORGE HENRY LEWES,
AUTHOR OF "LIFE OF GOETHE," "THE PHYSIOLOGY OF COMMON LIFE,'
oros, a seed.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 51
but there are curious indications of positive retro-
gression from a higher standard in the metamor-
phoses of some animals. Thus the beautiful marine
worm Terebella, which secretes a tube for itself, and
lives in it, fixed to the rock or oyster-shell, has in
early life a distinct head, eyes, and feelers ; but in
growing to maturity it loses all trace of head, eyes,
and even of feelers, unless the beautiful tuft of
streaming threads which it waves in the water be
considered as replacing the feelers. There are the
Barnacles, too, which in the first stage of their ex-
istence have three pairs of legs, a very simple single
eye, and a mouth furnished with a proboscis. In
the second stage they have six pairs of legs, two
compound eyes complex in structure, two feelers,
but no mouth. In the third, or final stage, their
legs are transformed into prehensile organs, they
have recovered a mouth, but have lost their feelers,
and their two complex eyes are degraded to a single
and very simple eye-spot.
But, to break up these digressions, let us try a
sweep with our net. We skim it along the surface,
and draw up a quantity of duckweed, dead leaves,
bits of stick, and masses of green thread of great
fineness, called Conferva by botanists. The water
runs away, and we turn over the mass. Here is a
fine water-beetle, called the " Water-tiger," from its
ferocity (Fig. 12). You would hardly suspect that
the slim, big-headed, long-tailed Water-tiger would
grow into the squat, small-headed, tailless beetle ;
52
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
Fig. 12. WATEE BEETLE and its larva.
nor would you imagine that this Water-tiger would
be so "high fantas-
tical" as to breathe
by his tail. Yet he
does both, as you will
find if you watch
him in your aqua-
rium.
Continuing our
search, we light up-
on the fat, sluggish,
ungraceful larva of
the graceful and bril-
liant Dragon-fly, the
falcon of insects (Fig.
13). He is useful
for dissection, so pop
Fig.i3.-DBAGON-FLYL AR v, E : him in. Among the
A, ordinary aspect; B, with the huge nipper-
like jaw extended. dead leaves you per-
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
53
ceive several small leeches, and flat oval Plana-
rice, white and brown ; and here also is a jelly-
like mass, of pale yellow color, which we know
to be a mass of eggs deposited by some shell-
fish; and, as there are few objects of greater inter-
est than an egg in course of development, we pop
the mass in. Here (Fig. 14) are two mollusks, Lim-
Fig. 14 A, LIMN^US STAGNALIS, or Water-snail.
B, PLANOBBIS.
nceus and Planorbis, one of which is probably the
parent of those eggs.
And here is one which
lays no eggs, but brings
forth its young alive : it
is the Paludina vivipara
(Fig. 15), of which we
learned some interest-
ing details last month. Fig. IS. PALCDIHA VIVH-AKA.
54 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
Scattered over the surface of the net and dead leaves
are little dabs of dirty -looking jelly some of them,
instead of the dirty hue, are almost blood-red. Ex-
perience makes me aware that these dirty dabs are
certainly Polypes the Hydra fusca of systematists.
I can't tell how it is I know them, nor how you may
know them again. The power of recognition must
be acquired by familiarity ; and it is because men
can't begin with familiarity, and can't recognize these
Polypes without it, that so few persons really ever
see them. But the familiarity may be acquired by a
very simple method. Make it a rule to pop every
unknown object into your wide-mouthed phial. In
the water it will probably at once reveal its nature :
if it be a Polype, it will expand its tentacles ; if not,
you can identify it at leisure on reaching home by
the aid of pictures and descriptions. See, as I drop
one of these into the water, it at once assumes the well-
known shape of the Polype. And now we will see
what these blood-red dabs may be ; in spite of their
unusual color, I can not help suspecting them to be
Polypes also. Give me the camel-hair brush. Gen-
tly the dab is removed, and transferred to the phial.
Shade of Trembley ! it is a Polype !* Is it possible
that this discovery leaves you imperturbable, even
* TREMBLEY, in his admirable work, Memoires pour servir a
Vkistoire dune genre de Polypes deau dome, 1744, furnished science
with the fullest and most accurate account of fresh-water Polypes ;
but it is a mistake to suppose that he was the original discoverer of
this genus : old LEUWENHOEK had been before him.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 55
when I assure you it is of a species hitherto unde-
scribed in text-books ? Now don't be provokingly
indifferent ! rouse yourself to a little enthusiasm,
and prove that you have something of the natural-
ist in you by delighting in the detection of a new
species. "You didn't know that it was new?"
That explains your calmness. There must be a
basis of knowledge before wonder can be felt
wonder being, as Bacon says, " broken knowledge."
Learn, then, that hitherto only three species of
fresh-water Polypes have been described: Hydra
viridis, Hydra fusca, and Hydra grisea. We have
now a fourth to swell the list; we will christen it
Hydra rubra, and be as modest in our glory as we
can. If any one puts it to us whether we seriously
attach importance, to such trivialities as specific dis-
tinctions resting solely upon color or size, we can
look profound, you know, and repudiate the charge.
But this is a public and official attitude. In pri-
vate we can despise the distinctions established by
others, but keep a corner of favoritism for our own.*
I remember once showing a bottle containing
Polypes to a philosopher, who beheld them with
great calmness. They appeared to him as insignifi-
* The editors of the Annals of Natural History append a note to
the account I sent them of this new Polype, from which it appears
that Dr. Gray found this very species, and apparently in the. same
spot, nearly thirty years ago. But the latest work of authority,
VAN DER HOVEN'S Handbook of Zoology, only enumerates the three
species.
56 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
cant as so many stems of duckweed ; and, lest you
should be equally indifferent, I will at once inform
you that these creatures will interest you as much
as any that can be found in ponds, if you take the
trouble of studying them. They can be cut into
many pieces, and each piece will grow into a per-
fect Polype ; they may be pricked or irritated, and
the irritated spot will bud a young Polype, as a
plant buds; they may be turned inside out, and
their skin will become a stomach, their stomach a
skin. They have acute sensibility to light (toward
which they always move), and to the slightest touch;
yet not a trace of a nervous tissue is to be found in
them. They have powers of motion and locomo-
tion, yet their muscles are simply a network of
large contractile cells. If the water in which they
are kept be not very pure, they will be found in-
fested with parasites ; and quite recently I have no-
ticed an animal or vegetal parasite I know not
which forming an elegant sort of fringe to the
tentacles ; clusters of skittle-shaped bodies, too en-
tirely transparent for any structure whatever to tie
made out, in active agitation, like leaves fluttering
on a twig. Some day or other we may have occa-
sion to treat of the Polypes in detail, and to narrate
the amusing story of their discovery ; but what has
already been said will serve to sharpen your atten-
tion, and awaken some curiosity in them.
Again and again the net sweeps among the weed
or dredges the bottom of the pond, bringing up mud,
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 57
stones, sticks, with a fish, worms, mollusks, and tri-
tons. The fish we must secure, for it is a stickle-
back a pretty and interesting inhabitant of an
aquarium, on account of its nest-building propensi-
ties. We are surprised at a fish building a nest
and caring for its young like the tenderest of birds
(and there are two other fishes, the Goramy and the
Hassar, which have this instinct); but why not a
fish as well as a bird? The catfish swims about
in company with her young, like a proud hen with
her chickens, and the sunfish hovers for weeks over
her eggs, protecting them against danger.
The wind is so piercing, and my fingers are so
benumbed, I can scarcely hold the brush. More-
over, continual stooping over the net makes the
muscles ache unpleasantly, and suggests that each
cast shall be the final one. But somehow I have
made this resolution and broken it twenty times :
either the cast has been unsuccessful, and one is
provoked to try again, or it is so successful that, as
Tappetit vient en mangeant, one is seduced again.
Yery unintelligible this would be to the passers-
by, who generally cast contemptuous glances at us
when they find we are not fishing, but are only re-
moving nothings into a glass jar. One day an
Irish laborer stopped and asked me if I were fish-
ing for salmon. I quietly answered "Yes." He
drew near. I continued turning over the weed, oc-
casionally dropping an invisible thing into the wa-
ter. At last a large yellow-bellied Triton was
C2
58 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
dropped in. He begged to see it; and, seeing at
the same time how alive the water was with tiny
animals, became curious, and asked many questions.
I went on with my work ; his interest and curiosity
increased ; his questions multiplied ; he volunteered
assistance ; and remained beside me till I prepared
to go away, when he said seriously, "Och! then,
and it's a fine thing to be able to name all God's
creatures." Contempt had given place to rever-
ence ; and so it would be with others, could they
check the first rising of scorn at what they do not
understand, and patiently learn what even a road-
side pond has of Nature's wonders.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 69
CHAPTER HI.
A garden Wall, and its Traces of past Life. Not a Breath per-
ishes. A Bit of dry Moss and its Inhabitants. The "Wheel-
bearers." Resuscitation of Rotifers: drowned into Life.
Current Belief that Animals can be revived after complete De-
siccation. Experiments contradicting the Belief. Spallanzani's
Testimony. Value of Biology as a Means of Culture. Classi-
fication of Animals : the five great Types. Criticism of Cu-
vier's Arrangement.
PLEASANT, both to eye and mind, is an old gar-
den wall, dark with age, gray with lichens, green
with mosses* of beautiful hues and fairy elegance of
form ; a wall shutting in some sequestered home,
far from "the din of murmurous cities vast;" a
home where, as we fondly, foolishly think, Life
must needs throb placidly,. and all its tragedies and
pettinesses be unknown. As we pass alongside this
wall, the sight of the overhanging branches sug-
gests an image of some charming nook; or our
thoughts wander about the wall itself, calling up
the years during which it has been warmed by the
sun, chilled by the night airs and the dews, and
dashed against by the wild winds of March, all of
which have made it quite another wall from what
it was when the trowel first settled its bricks. The
old wall has a past, a life, a story ; as Wordsworth
60 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
finely says of the mountain, it is " familiar with for-
gotten years." Not only are there obvious traces
of age in the crumbling mortar and the battered
brick, but there are traces, not obvious except to
the inner eye, left by every ray of light, every rain-
drop, every gust. Nothing perishes. In the won-
drous metamorphosis momently going on every
where in the universe, there is change, but no loss.
Lest you should imagine this to be poetry, and
not science, I will touch on the evidence that every
beam of light, or every breath of air which falls
upon an object, permanently affects it. In photog-
raphy we see the effect of light very strikingly ex-
hibited; but perhaps you wilt object that this proves
nothing more than that light acts upon an iodized
surface. Yet, in truth, light acts upon, and more or
less alters the structure of every object on which it
falls. Nor is this all. If a wafer be laid on a sur-
face of polished metal, which is then breathed upon,
and if, when the moisture of the breath has evapo-
rated, the wafer be shaken off, we shall find that the
whole polished surface is not as it was before, al-
though our senses can detect no difference ; for if
we breathe again upon it, the surface will be moist
every where except on the spot previously shelter-
ed by the wafer, which will now appear as a spec-
tral image on the surface. Again and again we
breathe, and the moisture evaporates, but still the
spectral wafer reappears. This experiment suc-
ceeds after a lapse of many months if the metal be
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 6i
carefully put aside where its surface can not be dis-
turbed. If a sheet of paper on which a key has
been laid be exposed for some minutes to the sun-
shine, and then instantaneously viewed in the dark,
the key being removed, a fading spectre of the key
will be visible. Let this paper be put aside for
many months where nothing can disturb it, and
then in darkness be laid on a plate of hot metal,
the spectre of the key will again appear. In the
case of bodies more highly phosphorescent than
paper, the spectres of many different objects which
may have been laid on in succession will, on warm-
ing, emerge in their proper order.*
This is equally true of our bodies and our minds.
We are involved in the universal metamorphosis.
Nothing leaves us wholly as it found us. Every
man we meet, every book we read, every picture
or landscape we see, every word or tone we hear,
mingles with our being and modifies it. There are
cases on record of ignorant women, in states of in-
sanity, uttering Greek and Hebrew phrases, which
in past years they had heard their masters utter,
without, of course, comprehending them. These
tones had long been forgotten ; the traces were so
faint that under ordinary conditions they were 'in-
visible ; but the traces were there, and in the in-
tense light of cerebral excitement they started into
prominence, just as the spectral image of the key
started into sight on the application of heat. It is
* DRAPER : Human Physiology, p. 288.
62 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
thus with all the influences to which we are sub-
jected.
If a garden wall can lead our vagabond thoughts
into such speculations as these, surely it may also
furnish us with matter for our Studies in Animal
Life. Those patches of moss must be colonies.
Suppose we examine them. I pull away a small
bit, which is so dry that the dust crumbles at a
touch ; this may be wrapped in a piece of paper
dirt and all and carried home. Get the micro-
scope ready, and now attend.
I moisten a fragment of this moss with distilled
water. Any water will do as well, but the use of
distilled water prevents your supposing that the
animals you are about to watch were brought in it,
and were not already in the moss. I now squeeze
the bit between my fingers, and a drop of the con-
tained water somewhat turbid with dirt falls on
the glass slide, which we may now put on the mi-
croscope stage. A rapid survey assures us that
there is no animal visible. The moss is squeezed
again, and this time little yellowish bodies of an
irregular oval are noticeable among the particles
of dust and moss. Watch one of these, and pres-
ently you will observe a slow bulging at one end,
and then a bulging at the other end. The oval
has elongated itself into a form not unlike that-
of a fat caterpillar, except that there is a tapering
at one end. Now a forked tail is visible ; this fixes
on to the glass, while the body swings to and fro.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
Now the head is drawn in as if it were swallowed
and suddenly in its place are unfolded two broad
membranes, having each a circle of waving cilia.
The lifeless oval has become a living animal ! You
have assisted at a resuscitation, not from death by
drowning, but by drying: the animal has been
drowned into life ! The unfolded membranes, with
their cilia, have so much the appearance of wheels
that the name of " "Wheel-bearer" (Rotifera) or
" Wheel Animalcule" has been given to the animal.
Fig. 16. ROTTFEB VULGABIB.
A, with the wheels drawn in (at c). B, with the wheels expanded; 6, eye
ppots; e, jaw and teeth; /, alimentary canal; gr, embryo; A, embryo further
developed : ?', water- vascular system ; fc, vent.
64 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
The Eotifera (also, and more correctly, called
Rotatoria) form an interesting study. Let us glance
at their organization :
There are many different kinds of Kotifers, vary-
ing very materially in size and shape, the males, as
was stated in the last chapter, being more imper-
fectly organized than the females. They may be
seen either swimming rapidly through the water
by means of the vibratile cilia called " wheels," be-
cause the optical effect is very much that of a
toothed wheel, or crawling along the side of the
glass, fastening to it by the head, and then curving
the body till the tail is brought up to the spot,
which is then fastened on by the tail, and the head
is set free. They may also be seen fastened to a
weed, or the glass, by the tail, the body waving to
and fro, or thrusting itself straight out, and setting
the wheels in active motion. In this attitude the
aspect of the jaws is very striking. Leuwenhoek
mistook it for the pulsation of a heart, which its in-
cessant rhythm much resembles. The tail and the
upper part of the body have a singular power of
being drawn out or drawn in, like the tube of a
telescope. There is sometimes a shell or carapace,
but often the body is covered only with a smooth
firm skin, which, however, presents decided indica-
tions of being segmented.
The first person who described these Eotifers was
the excellent old Leuwenhoek,* and his animals
* LEUWENHOEK: Select Works, ii., p. 210. His figures, how-
ever, are very incorrect.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. t>5
were got from the gutter of a house-top. Since
then they have been minutely studied, and have
been shown to" be, not Infusoria, as Ehrenberg im-
agined, but Crustacea.* Your attention is request-
ed to the one point which has most contributed to
the celebrity of these creatures their power of re-
suscitation. Leuwenhoek described what you
have just witnessed, namely the slow resuscitation
of the animal (which seemed as dry as dust, and
might have been blown about like any particle of
dust) directly a little moisture was brought to it.
Spallanzani startled the world with the announce-
ment that this process of drying and moistening
of killing and reviving could be repeated fifteen
times in s accession; so that the Kotifer, whose nat-
ural term of life is about eighteen days, might, it
was said, be dried and kept for years, and at any
time revived by moisture. That which seems now
no better than a grain of dust will suddenly awaken
to the energetic life of a complex organism, and
may again be made as dust by the evaporation of
the water.
This is very marvelous; so marvelous that a
mind trained in the cultivated caution of science
will demand the evidence on which it is based.
Two months ago I should have dismissed the doubt
with the assurance that the evidence was ample and
* See LEYDIG : Ueber den Bau und die systematische Stellung
der Rdderthiere, in SIEBOLD und KOLLIKER'S Zeitschrift, vi., and
Ueber Hydatina Senta, in MULLER'S Arr.hiv, 1857.
66 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
rigorous, and the fact indisputable; for not only
had the fact been confirmed by the united experi-
ence of several investigators, it had stood the test
of very severe experiment. Thus, in 1842, M. Do-
yere published experiments which seemed to place
it beyond skepticism. Under the air-pump he set
some moss, together with vessels containing sul-
phuric acid, which would absorb every trace of
moisture. After leaving the moss thus for a week,
he removed it into an oven, the temperature of which
was raised to 300 Fahrenheit. Yet even this treat-
ment did not prevent the animals from resuscitating
when water was added.
In presence of testimony like this, doubt will seem
next to impossible. Nevertheless, my own experi-
ments leave me no choice but to doubt. Not hav-
ing witnessed M. Doyere's experiment, I ani not
prepared to say wherein its fallacy lies ; but that
there is a fallacy seems to me capable of decisive
proof. In M. Pouchet's recent work* I first read a
distinct denial of the pretended resuscitation of the
Eotifers ; this denial was the more startling to me,
because I had myself often witnessed the reawaken-
ing of these dried animals. Nevertheless, whenev-
er a doubt is fairly started, we have not done jus-
tice to it until we have brought it to the test of ex-
periment; accordingly, I tested this, and quickly
came upon what seems to me the source of the gen-
* POUCHET : Heterogenie, ou Traite de la Generation Spontanee,
1859, p. 453.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 67
eral misconception. Day after day experiments
were repeated, varied, and controlled, and with re-
sults so unvarying that hesitation vanished ; and as
some of these experiments are of extreme simplici-
ty, you may verify what I say with little trouble.
Squeeze a drop from the moss, taking care that
there is scarcely any dirt in it ; and, having ascer-
tained that it contains Eotifers or Tardigrades,*
alive and moving, place the glass slide under a bell-
glass, to shield it from currents of air, and there al-
low the water to evaporate slowly, but completely,
by means of chloride of calcium or sulphuric acid
placed under the bell-glass; or, what is still sim-
pler, place a slide with the live animals on the man-
telpiece when a fire is burning in the grate. If on
the day following you examine this perfectly dry
glass, you will see the contracted bodies of the Eo-
tifers, presenting the aspect of yellowish oval bodies;
but attempt to resuscitate them by the addition of
a little fresh water, and you will find that they do
not revive, as they revived when dried in the moss ;
they sometimes swell a little, and elongate them-
selves, and you imagine this is a commencement of
resuscitation; but continue watching for two or
-three days, and you will find it goes no further.
* The Tardigrade, or microscopic Sloth, belongs to the order of
Arachnida, and is occasionally found in moss, stagnant ponds, etc.
I have only met with four specimens in all my investigations, and
they were all found in moss. SPALLANZANI described and figured
it (very badly), and M. DOYEEE has given a fuller description in
the Annaks des Sciences, 2d series, vols. xiv., xvii., and xviii.
68 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
Never do these oval bodies become active crawling
Eotifers; never do they expand their wheels, and
set the oesophagus at work. No ; the Kotifer once
dried is dead, and dead forever.
But if, like a cautious experimenter, you vary
and control the experiment, and beside the glass
slide place a watch-glass containing Eotifers with
dirt or moss, you will find that the addition of wa-
ter to the contents of the watch-glass will often (not
always) revive the animals. What you can not ef-
fect on a glass slide without dirt, or with very little,
you easily effect in a watch-glass with dirt or moss ;
and if you give due attention you will find that in
each case the result depends upon the quantity of
the dirt. And this leads to a clear understanding
of the whole mystery ; this reconciles the conflict-
ing statements. The reason why Eotifers ever re-
vive is because they have not been dried they
have not lost by evaporation that small quantity
of water which forms an integral constituent of their
tissues; and it is the presence of dirt or moss which
prevents this complete evaporation. No one, I sup-
pose, believes that the Eotifer actually revives after
once being dead. If it has a power of remaining in
a state of suspended animation, like that of a frozen
frog, it can do so only on the condition that its or-
ganism is not destroyed; and destroyed it would
be if the water were removed from its tissues ; for,
strange as it may seem, water is not an accessory,
but a constituent element of every tissue; and this
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 69
can not be replaced mechanically it can only be
replaced by vital processes. Every one who has
made microscopic preparations must be aware that
when once a tissue is desiccated, it is spoiled; it
will not recover its form and properties on the ap-
plication of water, because the water was not orig-
inally worked into the web by a mere process of
imbibition like water in a sponge but by a molec-
ular process of assimilation, like albumen in a mus-
cle. Therefore I say that desiccation is necessarily
.death, and the Eotifer which revives can not have
been desiccated. This being granted, we have only
to ask, "What prevents the Eotifer from becoming
completely dried ? Experiment shows that it is the
presence of dirt or moss which does this. The
whole marvel of the Eotifer's resuscitation, there-
fore, amounts to this : that if the water in which it
lives be evaporated, the animal passes into a state
of suspended animation, and remains so as long as
its own water is protected from evaporation.
I am aware that this is not easily to be reconciled
with M. Doyere's experiment, since the application
of a temperature so high as 300 Fahrenheit (nearly
a hundred degrees above boiling water) must, one
would imagine, have completely desiccated the ani-
mals, in spite of any amount of protecting dirt. It
is possible that M. Doyere may have mistaken that
previously-noticed swelling up of the bodies, on the
application of water, for a return to vital activity.
Tf not, I am at a loss to explain the contradiction ;
70 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
for certainly in my experience a much more mod-
erate desiccation namely, that obtained by simple
evaporation over a mantelpiece or under a large
bell-glass always destroyed the animals if little or
no dirt were present.
The subject has recently been brought before the
French Academy of Sciences by M. Davaine, whose
experiments* lead him to the conclusion that those
Rotifers which habitually live in ponds will not re-
vive after desiccation, whereas those which live in
moss always do so. I believe the explanation to be
this : the Rotifers living in ponds are dried without
any protecting dirt or moss, and that is the reason
they do not revive.
After having satisfied myself on this point, I did
what perhaps would have saved me some trouble
if thought of before. I took down Spallanzani, and
read his account of his celebrated experiments. To
my surprise and satisfaction, it appeared that he
had accurately observed the same facts, but curious-
ly missed their real significance. Nothing can be
plainer than the following passage : " But there is
one condition indispensable to the resurrection of
wheel-animals : it is absolutely necessary that there
should be a certain quantity of sand; without it
they will not revive. One day I had two wheel-
animals traversing a drop of water about to evapo-
rate which contained very little sand. Three quar-
ters of an hour after evaporation they were dry and
* DAVAINE in Annales des Sciences Naturelles, 1858, x., p. 335.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 71
motionless. I moistened them with water to revive
them, but in vain, notwithstanding that they were
immersed in water many hours. Their members
swelled to thrice the original size, but they remain-
ed motionless. To ascertain whether the fact was
accidental, I spread a portion of sand, containing
animals, on a glass slide, and waited until it became
dry in order to wet it anew. The sand was care-
lessly scattered on the glass, so as to be a thin cov-
ering on some parts, and on others in a very small
quantity : here the animals did not revive ; but all
that were in those parts with abundance of sand re-
vived."* He further says that if sand be spread
out in considerable quantities in some places, much
less in others, and very little in the rest, on moist-
ening it the revived animals will be numerous in
the first, less numerous in the second, and none at
all in the third.
It is not a little remarkable that observations so
precise as these should have for many years passed
unregarded, and not led to the true explanation of
the mystery. Perhaps an inherent love of the mar-
velous made men greedily accept the idea of resus-
citation, and indisposed them to attempt an expla-
nation of it. Spallanzani's own attempt is certainly
not felicitous. He supposes that the dust prevents
the lacerating influence of the air from irritating and
injuring the animals. And this explanation is ac-
cepted by his translator.
* SPALLAKZAKI: Tracts on the Natural History of Animals and
Vegetable*: translated by Dalyell, ii., p. 129.
72 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
[Since the foregoing remarks were in type, M.
Gavarret has published (Annales des Sciences Natu-
relles, 1859, xi., p. 315) the account of his experi-
ments on Eotifers and Tardigrades, in which he
found that after subjecting the moss to a desiccation
the most complete according to our present means,
the animals revived after twenty -four hours' immer-
sion of the moss in water. This result seems flatly
to contradict the result I arrived at, but only seems
to contradict it, for in my experiments the animals,
not the moss, were subjected to desiccation. Nev-
ertheless, I confess that my confidence was shaken
by experiments so precise, and performed by so dis-
tinguished an investigator, and I once more resumed
the experiments, feeling persuaded that the detec-
tion of the fallacy, wherever it might be, would be
well worth the trouble. The results of these con-
trolling experiments are all I can find room for
here : Whenever the animals were completely separated
from the dirt, they perished ; in two cases there was
a very little dirt a mere film, so to speak in the
watch-glass and glass cell, and this, slight as it was,
sufficed to protect two out of eight, and three out
of ten Eotifers, which revived on the second day ;
the others did not revive even on the third day aft-
er their immersion. In one instance, a thin cover-
ing-glass was placed over the water on the slide,
and the evaporation of the water seemed complete,
yet this glass cover sufficed to protect a Eotifer,
which revived in three hours.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 73
If we compare these results with those obtained
by M. Davaine, we can scarcely avoid the conclusion
that it is only when the desiccation of the Eotifers
is prevented by the presence of a small quantity of
moss or of dirt between the particles of which they
find shelter that they revive on the application of
water. And even in the severe experiments of M.
Doyere and M. Gavarret, some of the animals must
have been thus protected ; and I call particular at-
tention to the fact that, although some animals re-
vived, others always perished. But if the organiza-
tion of the Kotifer or Tardigrade is such that it can
withstand desiccation if it only needs the fresh ap-
plication of moisture to restore its activity all, or
almost all the animals experimented on ought to
revive ; and the fact that only some revive leads us
to suspect that these have not been desiccated a
suspicion which is warranted by direct experiments.
I believe, then, that the discrepancy amounts to
this : investigators who have desiccated the moss
containing animals find some of the animals revive
on the application of moisture, but those who desic-
cate the animals themselves will find no instances
of revival.]
The time spent on these Eotifers will not have
been misspent if it has taught us the necessity of
caution in all experimental inquiries. Although
experiment is valuable nay, indispensable as a
means of interrogating Nature, it is constantly lia-
ble to mislead us into the idea that we have rightly
D
74 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
interrogated and rightly interpreted the replies;
and this danger arises from the complexity of the
cases with which we are dealing, and our proneness
to overlook or disregard some seemingly trifling
condition a trifle which may turn out of the ut-
most importance. The one reason why the study
of science is valuable as a means of culture, over
and above its own immediate objects, is that in it
the mind learns to submit to realities instead of
thrusting its figments in the place of realities en-
deavors to ascertain accurately what the order of
Nature w, and not what it ought to be or might be.
The one reason why, of all sciences, Biology is pre-
eminent as a means of culture, is, that, owing to the
great complexity of all the cases it investigates, it
familiarizes the mind with the necessity of attend-
ing to all the conditions, and it thus keeps the mind
alert. It cultivates caution, which, considering the
tendency there is in men to " anticipate Nature," is
a mental tonic of inestimable worth. I am far from
asserting that biologists are more accurate reasoners
than other men ; indeed, the mass of crude hypoth-
esis which passes unchallenged by them is against
such an idea. But, whether its advantage be used
or neglected, the truth nevertheless is, that Biology,
from the complexity of its problems, and the ne-
cessity of incessant verification of its details, offers
greater advantages for culture than any other branch
of science.
I have once or twice mentioned the words Mol-
s^pTupJ^
v v or TfeE if r
OF TfcE
STUDIES IN ANIMAL
lusk and Crustacean, to which the
with the language of Natural History wirl have at
tached but vague ideas ; and although I wanted to
explain these, and convey a distinct conception of
the general facts of classification, it would have
been too great an interruption. So I will here
make an opportunity, and finish the chapter with
an indication of the five types, or plans of struct-
ure, under one of which every animal is classed.
Without being versed in science, you discern at
once whether the book before you is mathematical,
physical, chemical, botanical, or physiological. In
like manner, without being versed in Natural His-
tory, you ought to know whether the animal be-
fore you belongs to the Yertebrata, Mollusca, Artic-
ulata, Kadiata, or Protozoa.
A glance at the contents of our glass vases will
yield us samples of each of these five divisions of
the animal kingdom. We begin with this Triton
(Fig. 17). It is a representative of the VERTEBRATE
division or sub-kingdom. You have merely to re-
member that it possesses a backbone and an inter-
nal skeleton, and you will at once recognize the
cardinal character which makes this Triton range
under the same general head as men, elephants,
whales, birds, reptiles, or fishes. All these, in spite
of their manifold differences, have this one charac-
ter in common they are all backboned ; they have
all an internal skeleton; they are all formed ac-
cording to one general tvpe. In all vertebrate ani-
76
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
Fig. 17. MALE TBITON, OR WATEB-NEWT.
mals the skeleton is found to be identical in plan.
Every bone in the body of a triton has its corre-
sponding bone in the body of a man or of a mouse ;
and every bone preserves the same connection with
other bones, no matter how unlike may be the va-
rious limbs in which we detect its presence. Thus,
widely as the arm of a man differs from the fin of
a whale, or the wing of a bird, or the wing of a bat,
or the leg of a horse, the same number of bones,
and the same connections of the bones, are found in
each. A fin is one modified form of the typical
limb ; an arm is another ; a wing another. That
which is true of the limbs is also true of all the
other organs; and it is on this ground that we
speak of the vertebrate type. From fish to man
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 77
one common plan of structure prevails, and the
presence of a backbone is the index by which to
recognize this plan.
The Triton has been wriggling grotesquely in
our grasp while we have made him our text, and,
now he is restored to his vase, plunges to the bot-
tom with great satisfaction at his escape. This wa-
ter-snail, crawling slowly up the side of the vase,
and cleaning it of the green growth of microscopic
plants, which he devours, shall be our representa-
tive of the second great division the MOLLUSCA.
I can not suggest any obvious character so distinct-
ive as a backbone by which the word mollusk may
at once call up an idea of the type which prevails
in the group. It won't do to say " shellfish," be-
cause many mollusks have no shells, and many ani-
mals which have shells are not mollusks. The
name was originally bestowed on account of the
softness of the animals. But they are not softer
than worms, and much less so than jellyfish. You
may know that snails and slugs, oysters and cuttle-
fish, are mollusks ; but if you want some one char-
acter by which the type may be remembered, you
must fix on the imperfect symmetry of the mol-
lusk's organs. I say imperfect symmetry, because it
is an error, though a common one, to speak of the
mollusk's body not being bilateral that is to say, of
its not being composed of two symmetrical halves.
A vertebrate animal may be divided lengthwise,
and each half will closely resemble the other ; the
78 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
backbone forms, as it were, an axis, on either side
of which the organs are disposed ; but the mollusk
is said to have no such axis, no such symmetry. I
admit the absence of an axis, but I deny the total
absence of symmetry. Many of its organs are as
symmetrical as those of a vertebrate animal i. e.,
the eyes, the feelers, the jaws and the gills in Cut-
tlefish, Eolids, and Pteropods ; while, on the other
hand, several organs in the vertebrate animal are as
asymmetrical as any of those in the mollusk i. e.,
the liver, spleen, pancreas, stomach, and intestines.*
As regards bilateral structure, therefore, it is only
a question of degree. The vertebrate animal is not
entirely symmetrical, nor is the mollusk entirely
unsymmetrical. But there is a characteristic dis-
position of the nervous system peculiar to mol-
lusks : it neither forms an axis for the body, as it
does in the Yertebrata and Articulata, nor a centre,
as it does in the Eadiata, but is altogether irregular
and unsymmetrical. This will be intelligible from
the following diagram of the nervous systems of a
mollusk and an insect, with which that of a starfish
may be compared (Fig. 18). Here you perceive
how the nervous centres and the nerves which
* In some cases of monstrosity these organs are transposed, the
liver being on the left, and the pancreas on the right side. It was
in allusion to a case of this kind, then occupying the attention of
Paris, that MOLIERE made his Mededn malgre Lui describe the
heart as on the right side, the liver on the left ; on the mistake be-
ing noticed, he replies, " Oui, autrefois ; mais nous avons change
tout cela."
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
79
Fig. 18. NERVOUS SYSTEM OP SEA-HABE (A) and CENTIPEDE (B).
Fig. 19. NERVOUS SYSTEM OF STARFISH.
80 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
issue from them are irregularly disposed in the
mollusks, and symmetrically in the insect.
But the recognition of a mollusk will be easier
when you have learned to distinguish it from one
of the AETICULATA, forming the third great divi-
sion the third animal type. Of these, our vases
present numerous representatives prawns, beetles,
water-spiders, insect-larvae, entomostraca, and worms.
There is a very obvious character by which these
may be recognized : they have all bodies composed
of numerous segments, and their limbs are jointed,
and they have mostly an external skeleton from
which their limbs are developed. Sometimes the
segments of their bodies are numerous, as in the
centipede, lobster, etc. ; sometimes several segments
are fused together, as in the crab ; and sometimes,
as in worms, they are indicated by slight markings
or depressions of the skin, which give the appear-
ance of little rings, and hence the worms have been
named Annelida, or Annulata, or Annulosa. In these
last-named cases the segmental nature of the type is
detected in the fact that the worms grow, segment
by segment ; and also by the fact that- in most of
them each segment has its own nerves, heart, stom-
ach, etc. each segment is, in fact, a zooid.*
Just as we recognize a vertebrate by the presence
of a backbone and internal skeleton, we recognize
an articulate by its jointed body and external skele-
ton. In both, the nervous system forms the axis
* The term zooid was explained in our last chapter.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 81
of the body. The Mollusk, on the contrary, has no
skeleton, internal or external,* and its nervous sys-
tem does not form an axis. As a rule, both verte-
brates and articulates have limbs, although there
are exceptions in serpents, fishes, and worms. The
Mollusks have no limbs. Backboned, jointed, and
non-jointed, therefore, are the three leading charac-
teristics of the three types.
Let us now glance at the fourth division the
EADIATA, so called because of the disposition of the
organs round a centre, which is the mouth. Our
fresh- water vases afford us only one representative
of this type the Hydra, or fresh-water Polype,
whose capture was recorded in the last chapter. Is
it not strange that while all the Kadiata are aquatic,
not a single terrestrial representative having been
discovered, only one should be found in fresh wa-
ter? Think of the richness of the seas, with their
hosts of Polypes, Actiniae, Jellyfish, Starfishes, Sea-
urchins, Sea-pens (Pennatulce), Lily -stars (Comatu-
Ice), and Sea-cucumbers (Rolothurice), and then com-
pare the poverty of rivers, lakes, and ponds, re-
duced to their single representative, the Hydra.
The radiate structure may best be exhibited by the
diagram of the nervous system of the Starfishf on
page 79.
* In the cuttlefish there is the commencement of an internal
skeleton in the cartilage-plates protecting the brain.
+ It is right to add that there are serious doubts entertained re-
specting the claim of a starfish to the possession of a nervous sys-
D2
82 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
Cuvier, to whom we owe this classification of the
animal kingdom into four great divisions, would
have been the first to recognize the chaotic con-
dition in which he left this last division, and would
have acquiesced in the separation of the PROTOZOA,
which has since been made. This fifth division in-
cludes many of the microscopic animals known as
Infusoria, and receives its name from the idea that
these simplest of all animals represent, as it were,
the beginnings of life.*
But Cuvier's arrangement is open to a more se-
rious objection. The state of science in his day
excused the imperfection of classing the Infusoria
and parasites under the Eadiata ; but it was owing, I
conceive, to an unphilosophical view of morphology
that he placed the mollusks next to the Yertebrata,
instead of placing the Articulata in that position.
He was secretly determined by the desire to show
that there are four very distinct types, or plans of
structure, which can not by any transitions be
brought under one law of development. Lamarck
and Geoffroy St. Hilaire maintained the idea of uni-
ty of composition throughout the animal kingdom :
in other words, that all the varieties of animal forms
were produced by successive modifications ; and
several of the German naturalists maintained that
the vertebrata in their embryonic stages passed
tern at all ; but the radiate structure is represented in the diagram,
as it also is, very clearly, in a Sea-anemone.
* Protozoa, from proton, first, and zoon, animal.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. S3
through, forms which were permanent in the lower
animals. This idea Cuvier always opposed. He
held that the four types were altogether distinct;
and by his arrangement of them, their distinctness
certainly appears much greater than would be the
case on another arrangement. But, without dis-
cussing this question here, it is enough to point out
the fact of the enormous superiority in intelligence,
in sociality, and in complexity of animal functions
which insects and spiders exhibit when compared
with the highest of the mollusks, to justify the re-
moval of the mollusca, and the elevation of the ar-
ticulata to the second place in the animal hierarchy.
Nor is this all. If we divide animals into four
groups, these four naturally dispose themselves into
two larger groups: the first of these, comprising
Vertebrata and Articulata, is characterized by a
nervous axis and a skeleton ; the second, comprising
Mollusca and Eadiata, is characterized by the ab-
sence of both nervous axis and skeleton. It is ob-
vious that a bee much more closely resembles a
bird than any mollusk resembles any vertebrate.
If there are many and important differences be-
tween the vertebrate and articulate types, there are
also many and important resemblances ; if the nerv-
ous axis is above the viscera, and forms the dorsal
line of the vertebrate, whereas it is underneath the
viscera, and forms the ventral line in the articulate,
it is, nevertheless, in both, the axis of the body, and
in both it sends off nerves to supply symmetrical
84 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
limbs ; in both it has similar functions. And while
the articulata thus approach in structure the verte-
brate type, the mollusca are not only removed from
that type by many diversities, but a number of them
have such affinities with the Eadiate type that it is
only in quite recent days that the whole class of
Polyzoa (or Bryozoa, as they are also called) has
been removed from the Eadiata, and ranged under
the Mollusca.
To quit this topic, and recur once more to the
five divisions, we have only the broad outlines of
the picture in Yertebrata, Mollusca, Articulata, Ea-
diata, and Protozoa ; but this is a good beginning,
and we can now proceed to the further subdivisions.
Each of these five sub-kingdoms is divided into
classes; these, again, into orders; these into fami-
lies; these into genera; these into species; and
these, finally, into varieties. Thus, suppose a dwarf
terrier is presented to us with a request that we
should indicate its various titles in the scheme of
classification : we begin by calling it a vertebrate ;
we proceed to assign its class as the mammalian ;
its order is obviously that of the carnivora ; its
family is that of the fox, wolf, jackal, etc., named
Canidce ; its genus is, of course, that of Canis ; its
species, terrier; its variety, dwarf terrier. Inas-
much as all these denominations are the expres-
sions of scientific research, and not at all arbitrary
or fanciful, they imply an immense amount of labor
and sagacity in their establishment ; and when we
{STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 85
remember that naturalists have thus classed upward
of half a million of distinct species, it becomes an
interesting inquiry, What has been -the guiding
principle of this successful labor? on what basis is
so large a superstructure raised ? This question we
shall answer in the next chapter.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
CHAPTER IV.
An extinct Animal recognized by its Tooth : how came this to be
possible ? The Task of Classification. Artificial and natural
Methods. Linnaeus, and his Baptism of the Animal Kingdom:
his Scheme of Classification. What is there underlying all
true Classification? The chief Groups. What is a Species?
Restatement of the Question respecting the Fixity or Variability
of Species. The two Hypotheses. Illustration drawn from the
Romance Languages. Caution to Disputants.
I WAS one day talking with Professor Owen in the
Hunterian Museum, when a gentleman approached
with a request to be informed respecting the nature
of a curious fossil which had been dug up by one
of his workmen. As he drew the fossil from a
small bag, and was about to hand it for examina-
tion, Owen quietly remarked, " That is the third
molar of the under jaw of an extinct species of rhi-
noceros." The astonishment of the gentleman at
this precise, and confident description of the fossil,
before even it had quitted his hands, was doubtless
very great. I know that mine was, until the reflec-
tion occurred that if some one, little acquainted with
editions, had drawn a volume from his pocket, de-
claring he had found it in an old chest, any biblio-
phile would have been able to say at a glance,
"That is an Elzevir;" or, "That is one of the
Tauchnitz classics, stereotyped at Leipzig." Owen
is as familiar with the aspect of the teeth of ani-
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 87
raals, living and extinct, as a student is with the as-
pect of editions. Yet, before that knowledge could
have been acquired, before he could say thus confi-
dently that the tooth belonged to an extinct species
of rhinoceros, the united labors of thousands of dili-
gent inquirers must have been directed to the clas-
sification of animals. How could he know that the
rhinoceros was of that particular species rather than
another ? and what is meant by species ? To trace
the history of this confidence would be to tell the
long story of zoological investigation ; a story too
long for narration here, though we may pause a
while to consider its difficulties.
To make a classical catalogue of the books in the
British Museum would be a gigantic task ; but
imagine what that task would be if all the title-
pages and other external indications were destroy-
ed ! The first attempts would necessarily be of a
rough approximative kind, merely endeavoring to
make a sort of provisional order amid the chaos,
after which succeeding labors might introduce bet-
ter and better arrangements. The books might first
be grouped according to size ; but, having got them
together, it would soon be discovered that size was
no indication of their contents : quarto poems and
duodecimo histories, octavo grammars and folio
dictionaries, would immediately give warning that
some other arrangement was needed. Nor would
it be better to separate the books according to the
languages in which they were written. The pres-
88 STUDIO IN ANIMAL LIFE.
ence or absence of " illustrations" would furnish no
better guide, while the bindings would soon be
found to follow no rule. Indeed, one by one, all
the external characters would prove unsatisfactory,
and the laborers would finally have to decide upon
some internal characters. Having read enough of
each book to ascertain whether it was poetry or
prose and, if poetry, whether dramatic, epic, lyric,
or satiric; and if prose, whether history, philoso-
phy, theology, philology, science, fiction, or essay
a rough classification could be made ; but even then
there would be many difficulties, such as where to
place a work on the philosophy of history or the
history of science or theology under the guise of
science or essays on very different subjects, while
some works would defy classification.
Gigantic as this labor would be, it would be tri-
fling compared with the labor of classifying all the
animals now living (not to mention extinct species),
so that the place of any one might be securely and
rapidly determined ; yet the persistent zeal and sa-
gacity of zoologists have done for the animal king-
dom what has not yet been done for the library of
the Museum, although the titles of the books are
not absent. It has been done by patient reading of
the contents by anatomical investigation of the in-
ternal structure of animals. Except on a basis of
comparative anatomy, there could have been no
better a classification of animals than a classification
of books according to size, language, binding, etc.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 89
An unscientific Pliny might group animals accord-
ing to their habitat; but when it was known that
whales, though living in the water and swimming
like fishes, were in reality constructed like air-
breathing quadrupeds when it was known that
animals differing so widely as bees, birds, bats, and
flying squirrels, or as otters, seals, and cuttlefish,
lived together in the same element, it became ob-
vious that such a principle of arrangement could
lead to no practical result. Nor would it suffice to
class animals according to their modes of feeding,
since in all classes there are samples of each mode.
Equally unsatisfactory would be external form
the seal and the whale resembling fishes, the worm
resembling the eel, and the eel the serpent.
Two things were necessary : first, that the struc-
ture of various animals should be minutely studied
and described which is equivalent to reading the
books to be classified ; and, secondly, that some ar-
tificial method should be devised of so arranging the
immense mass of details as to enable them to be re-
membered, and also to enable fresh discoveries readi-
ly to find a place in the system. We may be per-
fectly familiar with the contents of a book, yet
wholly at a loss where to place it. If we have to
catalogue Hegel's Philosophy of History, for exam-
ple, it becomes a difficult question whether to place
it under the rubric of philosophy, or under that of
history. To decide this point, we must have some
system of classification.
90 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
In the attempts to construct a system, naturalists
are commonly said to have followed two methods,
the artificial and the natural. The artificial method
seizes some one prominent characteristic, and groups
all the individuals together which agree in this one
respect. In Botany the artificial method classes
plants according to the organs of reproduction ; but
this has been found so very imperfect that it has
been abandoned, and the natural method has been
substituted, according to which the whole structure
of the plant determines its place. If flying were
taken as the artificial basis for the grouping of some
animals, we should find insects and birds, bats and
flying squirrels grouped together; but the natural
method, taking into consideration not one character,
but all the essential characters, finds that insects,
birds, and bats differ profoundly in their organiza-
tion : the insect has wings, but its wings are not
formed like those of the bird, nor are those of the
bird formed like those of the bat. The insect does
not breathe by lungs, like the bird and the bat ; it
has no internal skeleton, like the bird and the bat ;
and the bird, although it has many points in com-
mon with the bat, does not, like it, suckle its young;
and thus we may run over the characters of each
organization, and find that the three animals belong
to widely different groups.
It is to Linnaeus that we are indebted for the
most ingenious and comprehensive of the many
schemes invented for the cataloguing of animal
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 91
forms, and modern attempts at classification are
only improvements on the plan he laid down. First
we may notice his admirable invention of the double
names. It had been the custom to designate plants
and animals according to some name common to a
large group, to which was added a description more
or less characteristic. An idea may be formed of
the necessity of a reform by conceiving what a la-
borious and uncertain task it would be if our friends
spoke to us of having seen a dog in the garden, and
on our asking what kind of a dog, instead of their
saying " a terrier, a bull-terrier, or a Skye-terrier,"
they were to attempt a description of the dog.
Something of this kind was the labor of under-
standing the nature of an animal from the vague
description of it given by naturalists. Linnaeus
rebaptized the whole animal kingdom upon one
intelligible principle. He continued to employ the
name common to each group, such as that of Felis
for the cats, which became the generic name ; and
in lieu of the description which was given of each
different kind to indicate that it was a lion, a tiger,
a leopard, or a domestic cat, he affixed a specific
name : thus the animal bearing the description of a
lion became Felis leo ; the tiger, Felis tigris ; the
leopard, Felis leopardus ; and our domestic friend,
Felis catus. These double names, as Yogt remarks,
are like the Christian- and sur-names by which we
distinguish the various members of one family ; and
instead of speaking of Tomkinson with the flabby
92 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
face and Tomkinson with the square forehead, we
simply say John and William Tomkinson.
Linnaeus did more than this. He not only fixed
definite conceptions of species and genera, but in-
troduced those of orders and classes. Cuvier added
families to genera, and sub-kingdoms (embranclie-
menis) to classes. Thus a scheme was elaborated
by which the whole animal kingdom was arranged
in subordinate groups : the sub-kingdoms were di-
vided into classes, the classes into orders, the orders
into families, the families into genera, the genera
into species, and the species into varieties. The
guiding principle of anatomical resemblance determ-
ined each of these divisions. Those largest groups,
which resemble each other only in having what is
called the typical character in common, are brought
together under the first head. Thus all the groups
which agree in possessing a backbone and internal
skeleton, although they differ widely in form, struc-
ture, and habitat, do nevertheless resemble each
other more than they resemble the groups which
have no backbone. This great division having been
formed, it is seen to arrange itself in very obvious
minor divisions or classes the mammalia, birds,
reptiles, and fishes. All mammals resemble each
other more than they resemble birds ; all reptiles
resemble each other more than they resemble fishes
(in spite of the superficial resemblance between ser-
pents and eels or lampreys). Each class, again,
falls into the minor groups of orders, and on the
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 93
same principles the monkeys being obviously dis-
tinguished from rodents, and the carnivora from
the ruminating animals ; and so of the rest. In each
order there are generally families, and the families
fall into genera, which differ from each other only
in fewer and less important characters. The genera
include groups which have still fewer differences,
and are called species; and these, again, include
groups which have only minute and unimportant
differences of color, size, and the like, and are call-
ed sub-species, or varieties.
"Whoever looks at the immensity of the animal
kingdom, and observes how intelligibly and system-
atically it is arranged in these various divisions,
will admit that, however imperfect, the scheme is a
magnificent product of human ingenuity and labor.
It is not an arbitrary arrangement, like the group-
ing of the stars in constellations; it expresses,
though obscurely, the real order of Nature. All
true classification should be to forms what laws are
to phenomena; the one reducing varieties to sys-
tematic order, as the other reduces phenomena to
their relation of sequence. Now if it be true that
the classification expresses the real order of Nature,
and not simply the order which we may find con-
venient, there will be something more than mere
resemblance indicated in the various groups; or,
rather let me say, this resemblance itself is the con-
sequence of some community in the things com-
pared, and will therefore be the mark of some deep-
94 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
er cause. What is this cause ? Mr. Darwin holds
that "propinquity of descent the only known
cause of the similarity of organic beings is the
bond, hidden as it is by various degrees of modifi-
cation, which is partially revealed to us by our
classifications"* " that the characters which natu-
ralists consider as showing true affinity between
any two or more species are those which have been
inherited from a common parent, and in so far all
true classification is genealogical; that community
of descent is the hidden bond which naturalists
have been unconsciously seeking, and not pome
unknown plan of creation, or the enunciation of
general propositions, and the mere putting together
and separating objects more or less alike."f
Before proceeding to open the philosophical dis-
cussion which inevitably arises on the mention of
Mr. Darwin's book, I will here set down the chief
groups, according to Cuvier's classification, for the
benefit of the tyro in natural history, who will easi-
ly remember them, and will find the knowledge
constantly invoked.
There are four sub-kingdoms, or branches : 1.
Vertebrata; 2. Mollusca; 3. Articulata; 4. Eadi-
ata.
The YERTEBKATA consist of four classes : Mam-
malia, Birds, Eeptiles, and Fishes.
The MOLLUSCA consist of six classes : Cephalo-
poda (cuttlefish), Pteropoda, Gasteropoda (snails,
* DARWIN : Origin of Species, p. 414. f Ibid., p. 420.
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 95
etc.), Acephala (oysters, etc.), Brachiopoda, and Cir-
rhopoda (barnacles). N.B. This last class is now
removed from the Mollusks and placed among the
Crustaceans.
The ARTICULATA are composed of four classes :
Annelids (worms), Crustacea (lobsters, crabs, etc.),
Arachnida (spiders), and Insecta.
The KADLATA embrace all the remaining forms;
but this group has been so altered since Cuvier's
time that I will not burden your memory just now
with an enumeration of the details.
The reader is now in a condition to appreciate
the general line of argument adopted in the discus-
sion of Mr. Darwin's book, which is at present ex-
citing very great attention, and which will, at any
rate, aid in general culture by opening to many
minds new tracts of thought. The benefit in this
direction is, however, considerably lessened by the
extreme vagueness which is commonly attached to
the word " species," as well as by the great want of
philosophic culture which impoverishes the major-
ity of our naturalists. I have heard or read few
arguments on this subject which have not impress-
ed me with the sense that the disputants really at-
tached no distinct ideas to many of the phrases they
were uttering. Yet it is obvious that we must first
settle what are the facts grouped together and indi-
cated by the word " species," before we can carry
on any discussion as to the origin of species. To
be battling about the fixity or variability of species,
96 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
without having rigorously settled what species is,
can lead to no edifying result.
It is notorious that if you ask even a zoologist,
What is a species? you will always find that he
has only a very vague answer to give ; and if his
answer be precise, it will be the precision of error,
and will vanish into contradictions directly it is ex-
amined. The consequence of this is, that even the
ablest zoologists are constantly at variance as to
specific characters, and often can not agree whether
an animal shall be considered of a new species or
only a variety. There could be no such disagree-
ments if specific characters were definite if we
knew what species meant, once and for all. Ask a
chemist, What is a salt ? What an acid ? and his
reply will be definite and uniformly the same:
what he says all chemists will repeat. Not' so the
zoologist. Sometimes he will class two animals as
of different species, when they only differ in color,
in size, or in the numbers of tentacles, etc. ; at other
times he will class animals as belonging to the same
species, although they differ in size, color, shape, in-
stincts, habits, etc. The dog, for example, is said to
be one species with many varieties or races. But
contrast the pug-dog with the greyhound, the span-
iel with the mastiff, the bull-dog with the Newfound-
land, the setter with the terrier, the sheep-dog with
the pointer; note the striking differences in their
structure and their instincts, and you will find that
they differ as widely as some genera and as some
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 97
species. If these varieties inhabited different coun-
tries if the pug were peculiar to Australia and the
mastiff to Spain there is not a naturalist but would
class them as of different species. The same re-
mark applies to pigeons and ducks, oxen and sheep.
The reason of this uncertainty is that the thing
species does not exist : the term expresses an ab-
straction, like virtue, or whiteness ; not a definite
concrete reality, which can be separated from other
things, and always be found the same. Nature pro-
duces individuals ; these individuals resemble each
other in varying degrees ; according to their resem-
blances we group them together as classes, orders,
genera, and species; but these terms only express
the relations of resemblance, they do not indicate the
existence of such things as classes, orders, genera, or
species.* There is a reality indicated by each term
that is to say, a real relation ; but there is no ob-
jective existence of which we could say, This is
variable, This is immutable. Precisely as there is
a real relation indicated by the term goodness, but
there is no goodness apart from the virtuous actions
and feelings which we group together under this
term. It is true that metaphysicians in past ages
angrily debated respecting the immutability of vir-
tue, and had no more suspicion of their absurdity
than moderns have who debate respecting the fixity
* CUVIER says, in so many words, that classes, orders, and gen-
era are abstractions, et rien de pareil n'existe dans la nature ; but
species is not an abstraction ! See Lettres a Pfaff, p. 179.
E
98 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
of species. Yet no sooner do we understand that
species means a relation of resemblance between
animals, than the question of the fixity or varia-
bility of species resolves itself into this : Can there
be any variation in the resemblances of closely al-
lied animals? A question which would never be
asked.
No one has thought of raising the question of
the fixity of varieties, yet it is as legitimate as that
of the fixity of species ; and we might also argue
for the fixity of genera, orders, classes, the fixity of
all these being implied in the very terms ; since no
sooner does any departure from the type present
itself, than ~by that it is excluded from the category ;
no sooner does a white object become gray or yel-
low, than it is excluded from the class of white ob-
jects. Here, therefore, is a sense in which the phrase
" fixity of species" is indisputable ; but in this sense
the phrase has never been disputed. When zoolo-
gists have maintained that species are variable, they
have meant that animal forms are variable; and
these variations, gradually accumulating, result at
last in such differences as are called specific. Al-
though some zoologists, and speculators who were
not zoologists, have believed that the possibility of
variation is so great that one species may actually
be transmuted into another, i. e., that an ass may be
developed into a horse, yet most thinkers are now
agreed that such violent changes are impossible,
and that every new form becomes established only
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 99
through the long and gradual accumulation of mi-
nute differences in divergent directions.
It is clear, from what has just been said, that the
many angry discussions respecting the fixity of spe-
cies, which, since the days of Lamarck, have dis-
turbed the amity of zoologists and speculative phi-
losophers, would have been considerably abbrevia-
ted-had men distinctly appreciated the equivoque
which rendered their arguments hazy. I am far
from implying that the battle was purely a verbal
one. I believe there was a real and important dis-
tinction in the doctrines of the two camps ; but it
seems to me that, had a clear understanding of the
fact that species was an abstract term been uniform-
ly present to their minds, they would have sooner
come to an agreement. Instead of the confusing
disputes as to whether one species could ever be-
come another species, the question would have been,
Are animal forms changeable? Can the descend-
ants of animals become so unlike their ancestors, in
certain peculiarities of structure or instinct, as to be
classed by naturalists as a different species ?
ISTo sooner is the question thus disengaged from
equivoque than its discussion becomes narrowed
within well-marked limits. That animal forms are
variable is disputed by no zoologist. The only
question which remains is this : To what extent are
animal forms variable? The answers given have
been two : one school declaring that the extent of
variability is limited to those trifling characteristics
100 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
which mark the different varieties of each species ;
the other school declaring that the variability is in-
definite, and that all animal forms may have arisen
from successive modifications of a very few types,
or even of one type.
Now I would call your attention to one point in
this discussion which ought to be remembered when
antagonists are growing angry and bitter over the
subject; it is, that both these opinions are necessa-
rily hypothetical there can be nothing like posi-
tive proof adduced on either side. The utmost that
either hypothesis can claim is that it is more con-
sistent with general analogies, and better serves to
bring our knowledge of various points into har-
mony. Neither of them can claim to be a truth
which warrants dogmatic decision.
Of these two hypotheses, the first has the weight
and majority of authoritative adherents. It de-
clares that all the different kinds of bats, for exam-
ple, were distinct and independent creations, each
species being originally what we see it to be now,
and what it will continue to be as long as it ex-
ists : lions, panthers, pumas, leopards, tigers, jagu-
ars, ocelots, and domestic cats being so many origi-
nal stocks, and not so many divergent forms of one orig-
inal stock. The second hypothesis declares that all
these kinds of cats represent divergencies of the
original stock, precisely as the varieties of each kind
represent the divergencies of each species. It is
true that each species, when once formed, only ad-
STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE. 101
mits of limited variations ; any cause which should
push the variation beyond certain limits would de-
stroy the species, because by species is meant the
group of animals contained within those limits. Let
us suppose the original stock from which all these
kinds of cats have sprung to have become modified
into lions, leopards, and tigers in other words, that
the gradual accumulation of divergencies has re-
sulted in the whole family of cats existing under
these three forms. The lions will form a distinct
species; this species varies, and in the course of
long variation a new species, the puma, rises by the
side of it. The leopards also vary, and let us sup-
pose their variation at length assumes so marked a
form in the ocelot that we class it as a new spe-
cies. There is nothing in this hypothesis but what
is strictly consonant with analogies; it is only ex-
tending to species what we know to be the fact
with respect to varieties ; and these varieties which
we know to have been produced from" one and the
same species are often more widely separated from
each other than the lion is from the puma, or the
leopard from the ocelot. Mr. Darwin remarks that
" at least a score of pigeons might be chosen, which,
if shown to an ornithologist, and he were told that
they were wild birds, would certainly, I think, be
ranked by him as well-defined species. Moreover,
I do not believe that any ornithologist would place
the English carrier, the short-faced tumbler, the
runt, the barb, the pouter, and fantail in the same
102 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
genus, more especially as in each, of these breeds
several truly -inherited sub-breeds or species, as he
might have called them, could be shown him."
The development of numerous specific forms,
widely distinguished from each other, out of one
common stock, is not a whit more improbable than
the development of numerous distinct languages
out of a common parent language, which modern
philologists have proved to be indubitably the case.
Indeed, there is a very remarkable analogy between
philology and zoology in this respect: just as the
comparative anatomist traces the existence of simi-
lar organs, and similar connections of these organs,
throughout the various animals classed under one
type, so does the comparative philologist detect the
family likeness in the various languages scattered
from China to the Basque Provinces, and from Cape
Comorin across the Caucasus to Lapland a like-
ness which assures him that the Teutonic, Celtic,
Wendic, Italic, Hellenic, Iranic, and Indie languages
are of common origin, and separated from the Ara-
bian, Aramean, and Hebrew languages, which have
another origin. Let us bring together a French-
man, a Spaniard, an Italian, a Portuguese, a Walla-
chian, and a Khastian, and we shall hear six very
different languages spoken, the speakers severally
unintelligible to each other, their languages differ-
ing so widely that one can not be regarded as the
modification of the other ; yet we know most posi-
tively that all these languages are offshoots from
STUDIES IN ANIMAL
the Latin, which was once a living language, but
which is now, so to speak, a fossil. The various
species of cats do not differ more than these six
languages differ, and yet the resemblances point in
each case to a common origin. Max Muller, in his
brilliant essay on Comparative Mythology* has said,
" If we knew nothing of the existence of Latin
if all historical documents previous to the fifteenth
century had been lost if tradition, even, was silent
as to the former existence of a Eoman empire, a
mere comparison of the six Eoman dialects would
enable us to say that at some time there must have
been a language from which all these modern dia-
lects derived their origin in common ; for without
this supposition it would be impossible to account
for the facts exhibited by these dialects. Let us
look at the auxiliary verb. "We find :
Italian. Wallachian. Rhsetian. Spanish. Portuguese. French.
I am sono sum sunt sunt soy sou suis.
Thou art sei es eis erea es es.
He is e < (este) ei es he est.
We are siamo suntemu essen somos somos sommes.
You are siete suntefi esses sois sois etes (estes).
They are sono sunt eon (sun) son eao sent.
It is clear, even from a short consideration of these
forms, first, that all are but varieties of one common
type ; secondly, that it is impossible to consider any
one of these six paradigms as the original from
which the others had been borrowed. To this we
may add, thirdly, that in none of the languages to
which these verbal forms belong do we find the
* See Oxford Essays, 1856.
104 STUDIES IN ANIMAL LIFE.
elements of which they could have been composed.
If we find such forms as f ai aime, we can explain
them by a mere reference to the radical means which
French has still at its command, and the same may
be said even of compounds like f aimer ai, i. e., je-
aimer-ai, I have to love, I shall love. But a change
from je suis to tu es is inexplicable by the light of
French grammar. These forms could not have
grown, so to speak, on French soil, but must have
been handed down as relics from a former period
must have existed in some language antecedent to
any of the Eoman dialects. Now, fortunately, in
this case, we are not left to a mere inference, but as
we possess the Latin verb, we can prove how, by
phonetic corruption and by mistaken analogies,
every one of the six paradigms is but a national
metamorphosis of the Latin original.
"Let us now look at another set of paradigms :
Sanscrit. j|j Zend. Doric. sla U ic> Latin. Gothic. Armen.
I am asmi esmi ahmi enm yesmo sum im em.
Thou art asi essi ahi e