It is impossible for me to more than allude to these remarkable additions to our knowledge of these early forms, and until they have all been figured with natural outlines, and perplexing questions as to priority in discovery rectified, it will be difficult in some cases to accredit individual work. But in the light of these profound revelations, how blind seem the attempts to establish a classification on the forms heretofore familiar to us, and to rear these into circumscribed groups between which it was asserted no forms of intermediate kinds were to be expected! With the twenty-five or thirty species of fossil horses at our command, some with four toes, others with three, in various stages of reduction, it is interesting to bring back to mind the earnest Geoffroy St.-Hilaire painfully endeavoring to trace the genealogy of the horse, with a few widely-separated forms of extinct mammals as his only guide in the work.
The special investigations of Marsh and Leidy reveal an almost unbroken line from our present horse with its simple toe, and two rudimentary metatarsals in the shape of the splint-bones, to a creature in which metatarsals support rudimentary toes, and still other forms in which these rudimentary toes are working-toes, and below that again another form in which a fourth toe is seen as a rudiment, till forms are reached in which all the toes rest on the ground. It is still more striking to study attentively those earlier generalized horses with four toes, and follow the successive reduction in the number of toes as the later formations are reached, till in the latest deposits and at present we have the modern specialized horse with but a single toe, the lost toes represented by two slender bones hidden beneath the flesh. And now comes crowning proof that our modern horse has been derived from some three-toed progenitor, for in certain instances horses have come into existence with splint-bones developed into sturdy bones sustaining at the extremities phalangeal bones, and outside accessory hoofs! Such freaks of Nature demand an explanation. They receive a rational one through the theories of Darwin. Without the law of reversion, we are left in blind bewilderment.
While all these facts in overwhelming array testify to the extreme mutability of forms, induced oftentimes by apparently the most trivial of causes, and set at rest the question as to the fixedness of species, they show at the same time the richness of that store from which by natural selection forms may be selected.
Realizing the uniformity of Nature's laws, the human mind bravely asks, "Do these wonderful interpretations throw any light upon the origin of man?"
Rigidly adhering to the inductive method, science is prepared to show that man did not appear suddenly and free from those animal proclivities and passions which make him a sinful creature, but that he has risen from a lowly origin, and his passions and desires, but feebly repressed, may be as surely traced to ancestral traits, as the
