See page in:
1859
1860
1861
1866
1869
1872

Compare with:
1861
1869

had never been slowly upraised, and that the height of other mountains in other parts of the world had not recently been increased by slow degrees?
It has been objected, if natural selection be so powerful, why has not this or that organ been recently modified and improved? Why has not the proboscis of the hive-bee been lengthened so as to reach the nectar of the ... red-clover? Why has not the ostrich acquired the power of flight? But granting that these parts and organs have varied in the right direction— granting that there has been time sufficient for the slow work of natural selection, checked as it will be by intercrossing and the tendency to reversion, who will pretend that he knows the natural history of any one organic being sufficiently well to say that any particular change would on the whole be to its advantage? Can we feel sure that a long proboscis would not be a disadvantage to the hive-bee in sucking the innumerable small flowers which it frequents? Can we feel sure that a long proboscis would not, by correlation of growth, almost necessarily give increased size to other parts of the mouth, perhaps interfering with the delicate cell-constructing work? In the case of the ostrich, a moment's reflection will show that an enormous supply of food would be necessary in this bird of the desert, to supply force to move its huge body through the air. But such ill-considered objections are hardly worth notice.
The celebrated palæontologist, Professor Bronn, in his German translation of this work, has advanced various good objections to my views, and other remarks in its favour. Of the objections, some seem to me unimportant, some few are owing to misapprehension, and some are incidentally noticed in various parts of this volume. On the erroneous supposition that all the species of a region are believed by me to be changing