28) that this is the case with respect to the Orang, and specifies
all the more important muscles which are well known to serve with man
for the expression of his feelings. See, also, a description of several
of the facial muscles in the Chimpanzee, by Prof. Macalister, in `Annals
and Magazine of Natural History,' vol. vii. May, 1871, p. 342.

[14] `Anatomy of Expression,' pp. 121, 138.

Although Gratiolet emphatically denies[15] that any muscle
has been developed solely for the sake of expression,
he seems never to have reflected on the principle of evolution.
He apparently looks at each species as a separate creation.
So it is with the other writers on Expression. For instance,
Dr. Duchenne, after speaking of the movements of the limbs,
refers to those which give expression to the face, and remarks:[16]
"Le createur n'a donc pas eu a se preoccuper ici des besoins de
la mecanique; il a pu, selon sa sagesse, ou--que l'on me pardonne
cette maniere de parler--par une divine fantaisie, mettre en
action tel ou tel muscle, un seul ou plusieurs muscles a la fois,
lorsqu'il a voulu que les signes caracteristiques des passions,
meme les plus fugaces, lussent ecrits passagerement sur la
face de l'homme. Ce langage de la physionomie une fois cree,
il lui a suffi, pour le rendre universel et immuable, de donner
a tout etre humain la faculte instinctive d'exprimer toujours
ses sendments par la contraction des memes muscles."

Many writers consider the whole subject of Expression as inexplicable.
Thus the illustrious physiologist Muller, says,[17] "The completely
different expression of the features in different passions shows that,
according to the kind of feeling excited, entirely different groups