CHAPTER IX.

NATURAL SELECTION.

"The hypothesis of natural selection originally put forward as the origin of species has been really abandoned by Mr. Darwin himself, and is untenable. It is a misleading positive term denoting negative effects, and as made use of by those who would attribute to it the. origin of Man, is an irrational conception."

Futility of attempts to

nal forces.

AT the close of the preceding chapter, the outcome was glanced at of those lessons which had already been ignore inter- gathered from nature. They were recognised as teaching that there exists in each animal and plant a unity of force corresponding with its unity of frame, each living organism manifesting, by unmistakable external signs, the presence of such internal power the mysterious nature of which it was sought to bring home by a consideration of those deep-lying tendencies revealed in the facts of serial and other homology.

This notion of an "internal force" is very repugnant to some contemporary writers. But it is absolutely impossible to get rid of the idea of innate powers and tendencies the existence of which is everywhere manifested, not only in the organic world but in the inorganic world also. To conceive the universe as consisting of atoms acted on by external forces but having in themselves no power of coherence or response to such external actions, is a manifest absurdity. No one thing can act on any other, except that in such other there is an innate capacity of being acted on. Mr. Herbert Spencer conceives each animal as being built up of a multitude of "physiological units," each of which is credited with

"an innate tendency" to evolve the parent form from which it sprang. Mr. Darwin conceives each animal and plant to be built up of a number of " gemmules," each gemmule being the seat of powers, special tendencies and elective affinities of a most complex kind. In fact, as Mr. Lewes says, we have thus "the very power which was pronounced mysterious in larger organisms." It seems, as before said, simpler and far more natural to regard each animal as the seat of one governing force than as itself made up of a number of living creatures so minute as to be invisible to the highest power of the microscope, and each animated by a governing force of its own. Surely this is to multiply difficulties of conception against both sense and reason alike.

The great question as to how the different kinds of animals and plants which now people this planet first arose has been answered at various times in various ways. My own view has been expressed as follows:

Origin of species, the

view.

'It is quite conceivable that the material organic world may be so constituted that the simultaneous action upon it of all known forces, mechanical, physical, chemical, magnetic, terrestrial, and cosmical, together with other as yet unknown forces-which probably exist, may result in changes which are harmonious and symmetrical; just as the internal nature of vibrating plates causes particles of sand scattered over them to assume definite and symmetrical figures when made to oscillate in different ways by the bow of a violin being drawn along their edges. The results of these combined internal powers and external influences might be represented under the symbols of complex series of vibrations (analogous to those of sound or light) forming a most complex harmony or a display of most varied colours. In such a way the reparation of local injuries might be symbolized as a filling-up and completion of an interrupted rhythm. Thus also monstrous aberrations from typical structure might correspond to a discord, and sterility from crossing be compared with the darkness resulting from the interference of waves of light.

"Such symbolism will harmonize with the peculiar reproduction, before mentioned, of heads in the body of certain annelids, with the facts of serial homology, as well as those of bilateral and vertical symmetry. Also, as the atoms of a resonant body may be made to give out sound by the juxtaposition of a vibrating tuning-fork, so it is con

*Genesis of Species,' 2nd edition, p. 261.

ceivable that the physiological units of a living organism may be so influenced by surrounding conditions (organic and other) that the accumulation of these conditions may upset the previous rhythm of such units, producing modifications in them-a fresh chord in the harmony of nature-a new species !”

For the arguments by which this view is supported and antagonistic hypotheses contested, the reader is referred to the work from which the passage just quoted has been taken. Here it can be only incidentally defended, yet one passing remark may be now made. That characters of importance suddenly appearing are not really unlikely to persist, is confirmed by an observation made by Mr. Darwin himself, who tells us (in his 'Descent of Man,' vol. i. p. 233): "When any character has suddenly appeared in a race or species as the result of a single act of variation and this race is crossed with another not thus characterized, the characters in question do not commonly appear in a blended condition in the young, but are transmitted to them either perfectly developed or not at all."

The view of specific genesis which I support, though arrived at in complete independence, is more or less similar to that enunciated fifteen years ago by Professor Theophilus Parsons, of Harvard University in the United States. It also agrees in many respects with the views advocated by Professor Owen in the last volume of the Anatomy of Vertebrates,' under the term "derivation." He there says: "Derivation holds that every species changes in time, by virtue of inherent tendencies thereto."

original

Mr. Darwin, as every one knows, has attempted to account Mr. Darwin's for the appearance of new forms of animals and view. plants by a certain special process called by him "Natural Selection;" an hypothesis which may be thus shortly stated:

Every organism tends to multiply geometrically and to transmit a general likeness, with individual differences, to its offspring. No two individuals are quite alike. Past time is practically infinite. Each individual which survives to breed

does so through circumstances which favour him by enabling him to escape the destructive agencies of nature. Thus happy variations cause survival and transmission, and thus new species result from survival of which are the fittest to live, as shown by the event. The title of his well-known book is: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection.' This is equally the title of the last edition as of the first, and the words "by means of" appear in each case. At the end of the Introduction of the first edition he says: "I am convinced that natural selection has been the main, but not the exclusive means of modification." In the last edition he says: "I am convinced that natural selection has been the most important, but not the exclusive means of modification." Before the appearance of the last edition, however, Mr. Darwin published his 'Descent of Man ;' and a consideration of this last work in conjunction with his 'Origin of Species' will afford the best means of considering his whole position. It can by such a proceeding be seen what, if any, modifications have taken place in his views, and the value of his judgment may, it is obvious, be most fairly estimated by examining his own declarations with respect to his earlier beliefs and assertions.

Our attention, then, may first be directed to his earlier statements, in order that we may see whether he has modified his views, and, if so, how far and with what results. If he has, even by his own showing and admission, been over-hasty and seriously mistaken previously, we must be the more careful how we commit ourselves to his guidance now. It is here contended that Mr. Darwin's convictions have undergone grave modifications, and that the opinions adopted by him now are quite distinct from, and even subversive of, the views he originally put forth. The assignment of the law of "natural selection" to a subordinate position is virtually an abandonment of the Darwinian theory; for the one distinguishing feature of that theory was the "most important” or "main" position assigned to "natural selection." Not the less, however, may we thank Mr. Darwin for bringing

forward that theory, and for forcing on men's minds a recognition of the probability, if not more, of evolution and of the certainty of the action of "natural selection." For though the "survival of the fittest" is a truth which readily presents itself to any one who considers the subject; and though its converse, the destruction of the least fit, was recognised thousands of years ago, yet to Mr. Darwin, and (through Mr. Wallace's reticence) to Mr. Darwin alone, is due the credit of having first brought it prominently forward and demonstrated its truth in a volume which will doubtless form a landmark in the domain of zoological science.

We find even in the third edition of his 'Origin of Species' the following passages: "Natural selection can act only by taking advantage of slight successive variations; she can never take a leap, but must advance by short and slow stages" (p. 214). Again he says: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case" (p. 208). He adds:

"Every detail of structure in every living creature (making some little allowance for the direct action of physical conditions) may be viewed, either as having been of special use to some ancestral form, or as being now of special use to the descendants of this form-either directly, or indirectly through the complex laws of growth;" "and if it could be proved that any structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection."

And the words last cited occur on page 162 of his very last edition.

It is almost impossible for Mr. Darwin to have used words by which more thoroughly to stake the whole of his theory on the non-existence or non-action of causes equal in efficiency to natural selection. For why should such a phenomenon “annihilate his theory ?" Because the very essence of his theory, as at first stated, is to recognise only the conservation of minute variations directly beneficial to the