We do not feel quite sure that we seize Professor Kolliker's meaning
here, but he appears to suggest that the observation of the general
order and harmony which pervade inorganic nature, would lead us to
anticipate a similar order and harmony in the organic world. And this
is no doubt true, but it by no means follows that the particular order
and harmony observed among them should be that which we see. Surely
the stripes of dun horses, and the teeth of the foetal 'Balaena', are
not explained by the "existence of general laws of Nature." Mr.
Darwin endeavours to explain the exact order of organic nature which
exists; not the mere fact that there is some order.

And with regard to the existence of a natural system of minerals; the
obvious reply is that there may be a natural classification of any
objects--of stones on a sea-beach, or of works of art; a natural
classification being simply an assemblage of objects in groups, so as
to express their most important and fundamental resemblances and
differences. No doubt Mr. Darwin believes that those resemblances and
differences upon which our natural systems or classifications of
animals and plants are based, are resemblances and differences which
have been produced genetically, but we can discover no reason for
supposing that he denies the existence of natural classifications of
other kinds.

And, after all, is it quite so certain that a genetic relation may not
underlie the classification of minerals? The inorganic world has not
always been what we see it. It has certainly had its metamorphoses,
and, very probably, a long "Entwickelungsgeschichte" out of a nebular
blastema. Who knows how far that amount of likeness among sets of
minerals, in virtue of which they are now grouped into families and
orders, may not be the expression of the common conditions to which