much paper has been circulating--is really the solid gold of truth.
The Anniversary Meeting of the Geological Society seems to be an
occasion well suited for an undertaking of this kind--for an inquiry, in
fact, into the nature and value of the present results of
palaeontological investigation; and the more so, as all those who have
paid close attention to the late multitudinous discussions in which
palaeontology is implicated, must have felt the urgent necessity of some
such scrutiny.
First in order, as the most definite and unquestionable of all the
results of palaeontology, must be mentioned the immense extension and
impulse given to botany, zoology, and comparative anatomy, by the
investigation of fossil remains. Indeed, the mass of biological facts
has been so greatly increased, and the range of biological speculation
has been so vastly widened, by the researches of the geologist and
palaeontologist, that it is to be feared there are naturalists in
existence who look upon geology as Brindley regarded rivers. "Rivers,"
said the great engineer, "were made to feed canals;" and geology, some
seem to think, was solely created to advance comparative anatomy.
Were such a thought justifiable, it could hardly expect to be received
with favour by this assembly. But it is not justifiable. Your favourite
science has her own great aims independent of all others; and if,
notwithstanding her steady devotion to her own progress, she can scatter
such rich alms among her sisters, it should be remembered that her
charity is of the sort that does not impoverish, but "blesseth him that
gives and him that takes."
Regard the matter as we will, however, the facts remain. Nearly 40,000
species of animals and plants have been added to the Systema Naturae by
palaeontological research. This is a living population equivalent to that
of a new continent in mere number; equivalent to that of a new
hemisphere, if we take into account the small population of insects as
yet found fossil, and the large proportion and peculiar organization of
many of the Vertebrata.
But, beyond this, it is perhaps not too much to say that, except for the
necessity of interpreting palaeontological facts, the laws of
distribution would have received less careful study; while few
comparative anatomists (and those not of the first order) would have
been induced by mere love of detail, as such, to study the minutiae of
osteology, were it not that in such minu
|