short of its task. The theory seems to forget that there is the same beauty in the vegetable kingdom, the same beauty in lower as in higher animals, the same beauty in the inner surfaces of shells as in their outer forms. It seems to forget that there is really no proof that even in the higher forms of life there is present a perception of beauty, or any approach to that nice criticism of details out of which alone progress could come. If we recognize the simple fact, that beauty must usually be associated with vigorous lustful forces --- since it like these forces indicates the predominance of life --- we shall understand that even in those comparatively few cases in which sexual selection seems to be influenced by beauty, it is really proceeding on a plane of much lower and more physical endowments. The mate is not selected under the critical eye of taste, but under the eager, pushing appetites, that go with life, and are called out by life.

The beauty of the animal kingdom simply adds itself to that of the vegetable kingdom, and the two supplement that of the inorganic world. Thus all things stand together, the walls, columns and vaulting of a matchless temple.

We shall mention but one other special relation, that of animal life --- indeed of all life --- to man. We shall not enter into the general relation of extended service; this service is too common and constant, too much a matter of course, to admit easily of a fresh impression; we shall direct attention simply to the laws of heredity, and the way in which they put the various forms of life at the disposal of man.