that man--I mean the species Homo sapiens of zoological
terminology--has "consummated" the land-population in the sense
of appearing at a later period of time than any other. Let me
make my meaning clear by an example. From a morphological point
of view, our beautiful and useful contemporary--I might almost
call him colleague--the horse (Equus caballus), is the
last term of the evolutional series to which he belongs, just as
Homo sapiens is the last term of the series of which he
is a member. If I want to know whether the species Equus
caballus made its appearance on the surface of the globe
before or after Homo sapiens, deduction from known laws
does not help me. There is no reason, that I know of, why one
should have appeared sooner or later than the other. If I turn
to observation, I find abundant remains of Equus caballus
in Quaternary strata, perhaps a little earlier. The existence of
Homo sapiens in the Quaternary epoch is also certain.
Evidence has been adduced in favour of man's existence in the
Pliocene, or even in the Miocene epoch. It does not satisfy me;
but I have no reason to doubt that the fact may be so,
nevertheless. Indeed, I think it is quite possible that further
research will show that Homo sapiens existed, not only
before Equus caballus, but before many other of the
existing forms of animal life; so that, if all the species of
animals have been separately created, man, in this case, would
by no means be the "consummation" of the land-population.

I am raising no objection to the position of the fourth term in
Mr. Gladstone's "order"--on the facts, as they stand, it is
quite open to any one to hold, as a pious opinion, that the
fabrication of man was the acme and final achievement of the