Origin of Species Variorum

→ descendants from any 1872

many descendants from 1859 1860 1861 1866

descendants from 1869

→ OMIT 1869 1872

although having few characters in common, 1859 1860 1861

although having but few characters in common, 1866

→ although 1869 1872

we use descent in classing acknowledged varieties, however different 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ have but few characters in common; we use descent in classing acknowledged varieties, however different they may be 1869 1872

be 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ OMIT 1869 1872

between the descendants from a common parent, 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ OMIT 1869 1872

are permitted to 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ finding the relations between 1869 1872

comparing 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ and another, 1869 1872

with a distinct group, 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ within a few great classes; 1869 1872

in one great system; 1859 1860 1861 1866

→ are believed to have first 1872

first 1869

the high importance of looking to types, whether or not we can separate and define the groups to which such types belong.

Finally, we have seen that natural selection, which

results

follows

from the struggle for existence, and which almost inevitably

induces

leads to

extinction and divergence of character in the →descendants from any one

dominant

....

parent-species, explains that great and universal feature in the affinities of all organic beings, namely, their

sub-ordination

subordination

in group under group. We use the element of descent in classing the individuals of both sexes and of all

ages,

ages

→OMIT under one

species;

species,

→although they may →have but few characters in common; we use descent in classing acknowledged varieties, however different they may be from their

parent;

parents;

and I believe

this

that this

element of descent is the hidden bond of connexion which naturalists have sought under the term of the Natural System. On this idea of the natural system being, in so far as it has been perfected, genealogical in its arrangement, with the grades of difference →OMIT expressed by the terms genera, families, orders, &c., we can understand the rules which we are compelled to follow in our classification. We can understand why we value certain resemblances far more than others; why we →OMIT use rudimentary and useless organs, or others of trifling physiological importance; why, in →finding the relations between one group →and another, we summarily reject analogical or adaptive characters, and yet use

the

these

same characters within the limits of the same group. We can clearly see how it is that all living and extinct forms can be grouped together →within a few great classes; and how the several members of each class are connected together by the most complex and radiating lines of affinities. We shall never, probably, disentangle the inextricable web of

affinities

the affinities

between the members of any one class; but when we have a distinct object in view, and do not look to some unknown plan of creation, we may hope to make sure but slow progress.

Professor Häckel in his 'Generelle

Morphologic'

Morphologie'

and in

several

....

other works, has recently brought his great knowledge and abilities to bear on what he calls phylogeny, or the lines of descent of all organic beings. In drawing up the several series he trusts chiefly to embryological characters, but

draws

receives

aid from homologous and rudimentary organs, as well as from the successive periods at which the various forms of life →are believed to have first appeared in our geological formations. He has thus boldly made a great beginning, and shows us how classification will in the future be treated.