old shoes to keep out the damp and cold. Buffon was a man with a very keen interest in Natural History, and of remarkable industry and perseverance. In 1739 he was appointed Superintendent of the Jardin des Plantes at Paris, a post which he held till his death. In his great book on Natural History he gave a comprehensive account of all that was known concerning the distribution, habits, instincts, and structure of animals. Buffon strongly disapproved of the sharp lines and rigid systems of Linnæus, and was more fond of general theories than of minute details. His materials were derived rather from extensive reading than from direct observation, and, having weak eyesight himself, most of his anatomical work was done by assistants. His great reputation was due very largely to the exceedingly attractive style in which he wrote, and the charm with which he invested the whole subject. He led many to think about and take an interest in Natural History, and to add to it by their own observations, who would not otherwise have done so. Buffon must not, however, be thought of as a mere popular writer; he really opened up new fields and led the way in many matters of the utmost import ance. For instance, concerning the homologies of the mammalian skeleton, he was the first to compare the arm of man with the fore-leg of the horse. He also paid much attention to geographical distribution, and laid stress on the resemblance between the fauna of Northern Europe and that of America, and explained this by the existence of a former land connection wide enough to permit migrations. Moreover, the natural history of the various races of man was for the first time treated scientifically. Buffon, while at first a believer in the absolute fixity of species, later on was led to suggest that plants and animals may not be bound by fixed and immovable limits of species, but may vary freely, so that one kind may gradually and slowly be evolved by natural causes from the type of another. He points out the fundamental likenesses of type in many animals, underlying the external diversities of character and shape, which strongly suggest the notion of descent from some common ancestor. He goes further than this, and, granting the possibility of modification, sees no reason to fix its limits. He even suggests that from a single primordial being Nature has been able in the course of time to develop the whole continuous series of existing animal and vegetable life. This view is often expressed in a studiously guarded manner, and denied in half-ironical terms a few pages further on. This was the starting-point of the great idea of Evolution, and Buffon's name well deserves a place in its history. Before pursuing the progress of the theory of Evolution we must consider the work and personality of one of the greatest of all zoologists, Cuvier, and of his contemporaries. CUVIER, 1769-1832, was a man of extraordinary industry and ability, and of commanding power-one of the giants of biological science. He was born in France, of Swiss parentage, and originally intended for the Church. From 1788 to 1794 he was engaged as private tutor to a French family near Caen. At this time he commenced to study the fossil brachiopods, which led him to compare them with the living species. Having by this time attracted the notice of influential people, he was in 1794 invited to Paris, and was appointed Assistant Professor, and in 1802 Professor, of Comparative Anatomy at the Jardin des Plantes. After this he rapidly rose to posts of great importance and distinction. Cuvier was specially distinguished by the zeal with which he applied himself to the actual dissection of large numbers of animals of many groups, by the clearness with which he kept himself free from the vague theories of his day; also by the way in which he kept to his facts, drew his own conclusions from them, and absolutely rejected any theories that were opposed to them. Cuvier may justly be regarded as the father of Comparative Anatomy. His most important service was the demonstration of the true nature of fossils. About the time of his arrival in Paris attention was being directed to the skeletons and parts of skeletons of animals which were being disinterred round about Paris, especially at Montmartre. These constituted a great puzzle at the time, the bones of many of them being immensely large and unlike those of any known animals. Cuvier eagerly set to work at this subject, and the minute knowledge he had obtained of living animals rendered the work comparatively easy, while the law of correlation a single bone giving the clue to the structure, position, habits, food, &c., of the animal-helped him greatly. Cuvier was soon able to point out that the animals of which these were the remains were in many cases not like those now living in Europe; in other cases they were unlike animals living anywhere on the earth at the present time. Some, such as the elephant, rhinoceros, and opossum were no longer European ; others, such as the mammoth, were animals which at the present time are extinct. Attention was thus directed to this subject, and inquiry in other directions stimulated. In the older rocks other fossil remains still more unlike existing forms were discovered. Cuvier has exercised the greatest influence on the study of zoology down to the time of Darwin. He was the founder of Comparative Anatomy, and penetrated into the subject much more deeply than Linnæus, his object being not merely to systematise but to study the animals themselves. The real nature of fossils was known to Aristotle, but the knowledge was forgotten and lost. The current doctrine of the Middle Ages, and even so late as the eighteenth century, was that they were freaks of Nature, and they were regarded as unsuccessful creative attempts or models into which life had never been breathed. Cuvier overthrew all this finally, and proved that they were the remains of animals formerly dwelling on earth, and of different kinds or species to those now living. He, moreover, showed that the farther back we go in time, the more do they differ from recent animals. This was a tremendous step forwards, yet he stopped short, and held back on the brink of a great and comprehensive theory. He was struck with the differences rather than the resemblances among animals, and strenuously denied the possibility of any relation between recent and fossil forms, stating that "the immutability of species is a necessary consequence of the existence of scientific natural history." He formulated the doctrine of Catastrophism, or the periodical annihilation of existing animals followed by re-creation in a modified form. The question of the Origin of Species was now becoming a burning one. GOETHE, 1790, in an "Essay on the Metamorphosis of Plants" showed the principle of fundamental unity, and demonstrated that all parts of a flower are really modified leaves or stem. In the cultivated rose the stamens and pistils are turned into petals, and gardeners find it possible to cultivate a plant so that it shall be all leaves and no flower, or shall have a gorgeous flower while the leaves remain small and insignificant. It is a pleasant reflection to a naturalist that the keenest and brightest intellects of all ages have not been unmindful of the charms of Natural History, and that they have taken delight in, and have themselves made contributions of great value to the subject. It is grateful to acknowledge this indebtedness to men more widely known for their labours in other directions. Aristotle's first classification of animals on scientific principles-viz., into Vertebrates and Invertebrates-holds good to the present day; he also recognised the true nature of fossils as the remains of formerly living animals. To poets of all ages and every nation we owe many shrewd and accurate observations, especially on the habits of birds and flowers. Goethe was much struck with the power of modification or adaptation, |