The Darwinian theory of the transmutation of species / examined by a graduate of the University of Cambridge.

  • Beverley, R. M. (Robert Mackenzie), 1797 or 1798-1868.
Date:
1867
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The Darwinian theory of the transmutation of species / examined by a graduate of the University of Cambridge. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    399/408 (page 383)
    Professor Goppert on the Darwinian Theory. Int the August month of the Journal of Botany is an interesting paper by Professor H. R. Goppert, translated from the Nova Acta of the Impe- rial German Academy Naturae Curiosorum. The title of this essay is ‘On Aphyllostachys, a new genus of fossil plants of the Calamites group, and on the relation of the Fossil Flora to Darwin’s Theory of Transmutation.’ The learned Professor first notices Dr Hooker, who, in his ‘ Tasmanian Flora,’ has adopted the Theory of the Transmutationists. Nevertheless, Dr Hooker, it seems, does not find much to encourage him in his floral studies. ‘ He holds that, regarded from the classificatory point of view, the geological history of plants is not so favourable to the Theory of pro- gressive development as that of animals, because the earliest ascertained types are of such large and complex organization, and because there are no known fossil plants which can certainly assume to belong to a non- existing class, or even family, and none that are ascertained to be inter- mediate in affinity between recent classes and families.’ Dr Hooker also acknowledges the absence of genuine monocotvledonous plants in the ancient flora, and all this from an advocate is a serious ad- mission. Professor Goppert holds that ‘ our knowledge of fossil plants is amply sufficient to supply decided proofs ’ that there are no genetic relations in the geological history of plants such as the Transmutationists would require. He urges also that a high importance must be accorded to those species of plants, and to the more numerous animals, which have passed from the Tertiary period to our own time, and still more to those which have existed unaltered through three periods, as the Neuropteris Lostici, which ranges from the lower coal formation, through the upper to the Permian. ‘If we add to this,’ says the Professor, ‘the numerous families and genera which have remained unaltered since their first appearance, so that the same characters can be used for the definition of the different species that occur ifi all the geological periods, it is difficult to perceive where the mutations are to he found, which the different species are said to have undergone.’ The Professor then urges ‘ that in the very earliest times of the land Flora certain groups of plants, for instance, the Ferns, appear in a degree of perfection, previous to the gradual development of which an enormously long range of time, and numberless autetypes (which, however, are en- tirely wanting) would be required in the Darwinian Theory.’ Besides this some groups become extinct at very early geological periods, leaving