xi. c, 4 Copeland: Natural Selection 149 



but which he construes as opposed to this principle. 1 This 

 evidence has been published from time to time, always with the 

 implication which seems to me to be clearly a mistake, until it 

 seems to be well worth while to point out that this mass of 

 information has its value in the field of science that has its basic 

 principle in the doctrine of natural selection, but has no value 

 whatever in opposition to this doctrine. 



Doctor Willis's early attacks on the theory of natural selection 

 were devoted primarily to the support of the mutation theory 

 and its application to questions of survival. In making the facts 

 then at his disposal seem to invalidate the theory of natural 

 selection, he made demands upon the theory that seem to me 

 quite unfair, and then proposed that the theory be discarded, 

 because its supporters could not meet these demands. For 

 example, in the Annals of the Paradeniya Royal Botanic Gardens, 

 volume IV, page 3, we find (italics mine) : 



Now, upon the theory of natural selection of infinitesimal variations, 

 it is evident that any structure whatsoever must be capable of being shown 

 to be or to have been — 



(1) Of some actual use now; or 



(2) Of some use in the past, in its present or in a different, and 



perhaps larger (less aborted) form; or 



(3) Correlated with some useful structure, whether visible or not. 



I will agree that, upon the theory of natural selection, any 

 structure must be of use, have been of use, or be present as a 

 result of correlation. Perhaps, if it be of use, it is capable of 

 being shown to be of use. But by whom ? To demand that any 

 particular person or any one generation explain the uses of 

 all structures is to demand omniscience. It is no more the 

 fault of the theory than it is of the structure, if its interpretation 

 escape us. I believe that the use of the great majority of 



1 1. Some evidence against the theory of the origin of species by natural 

 selection, etc. Ann. Roy. Bot. Gardens Peradeniya 4 (1907) 1-15. 



2. Further evidence against the origin of species by infinitesimal varia- 



tions. Ibid. 17-19. 



3. The geographical distribution of the Dilleniaceae, etc., Ibid. 69-77. 



4. The floras of hill tops in Ceylon. Ibid. 4 (1908) 131-138. 



5. On the lack of adaptation in the Tristichaceae and Podostemaceae. 



Proc. Roy. Soc. London B. 87 (1914) 532. 



6. The origin of the Tristichaceae and Podostemaceae. Ann. Bot. 29 



(1915) 299. 



7. The endemic flora of Ceylon, with reference to geographical distri- 



bution and evolution in general. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London 

 B. 206 (1915) 307-342. 



8. The evolution of species in Ceylon, with reference to the dying out 



of species. Ann. Bot. 30 (1916) 1-23. 



