ZTAKnWlCKE'S SCIENCE-GOSSIP. 



211 



the main body of working biologists, who do 

 not, perhaps, go so far as the Neo-Darwinians, 

 but whose continually enlarging experience of the 

 wonderful and beautiful adaptations to be found in 

 every nook and cranny of the organic world and con- 

 stantly coming to light in their studies — anatomical, 

 histological, physiological, or bionomic — makes them 

 firm believers in natural selection, as overwhelmingly 

 the most important cause of evolution, and gives them 

 a reluctance — ^justifiable or the reverse — to place much 

 confidence in such supplementary factors as those I 

 have mentioned. 



Lastly we have the extreme "Neo-Darwinians," 

 as Professor Ray Lankester has called them, whose 

 position may be summarised as follows. They 

 assert : 



(i) That the inheritance of any character acquired 

 by an individual during its lifetime has never been 

 experimentally proved : (2) that hence we are ' not 

 justified in explaining any of the facts of evolution by 

 any process which involves such inheritance : (3) that 

 these facts can be as well or better explained by 

 natural selection and kindred selective processes in 

 conjunction with the effects of training during the 

 individual life-time than by the alleged inheritance of 

 acquired characters, and that hence the indirect 

 evidence for such inheritance can be refuted, and (4) 

 that the onus probandi x^^i's,, not on them, but on their 

 opponents, who would retain an unproved and un- 

 necessary (though hitherto universally-accepted) 

 factor, in our explanation of evolution. 



Professor Weismann, Professor Lankester, Professor 

 Meldola, Mr. Wallace, and Mr. Poulton are examples 

 of some of the more distinguished of the Neo- 

 Darwinians. 



In subsequent papers we shall be chiefly occupied 

 in investigating the justification of their views. 



THE WHITE FLOWER QUESTION. 

 By Fred. H. Davey. 



IT would indeed be passing strange if the interest- 

 ing correspondence on this subject did not lead 

 to some profitable conclusion. It is one of the 

 branches of botany which has notoriously held the 

 background, notwithstanding the probabilities that it 

 might ultimately throw valuable light on the origin 

 of new varieties, and thus minimise the labours of 

 the large and indefatigable band of biologists who 

 give their whole energies to a solution of the problem. 

 Albinism in the animal kingdom, more particularly 

 in the genus homo, has long been an interesting field 

 of labour to scientists, and from all accounts has led 

 to good results, so far as it has been proved albino 

 varieties may at times possess the power of trans- 

 mitting their peculiarities to their offspring. I don't 

 mean to assert it is an established fact that albinism 

 in the human family is hereditary. But I do say it is 

 now beyond the range of probabilities that in the 



lower animal creation, at least, albino varieties have 

 begotten progeny with similar tendencies. Why, 

 then, seeing it is of such vital importance, has the 

 subject of white variations in the vegetable kingdom 

 been so monstrously neglected ? 



I for one must object to the word albinism being 

 used in reference to floral variations which assume a 

 whitish colour. By an albino I understand an animal 

 possessing white feathers, white fur, white hair, or a 

 white skin, with the addition of pink or red eyes. I 

 freely admit in either instance the variation may be 

 the result of similar pathological modifications, but 

 even that hardly warrants a use of the same term in 

 both cases. Were it so, we might with as good 

 reason term the sweat-glands of the human body 

 stomata, or the system of tissues through which 

 nourishment is conveyed to the extremities of a plant 

 the alimentary canal. 



One cannot be too cautious in advancing opinions 

 on a subject so wide in its range and fraught with so 

 many difficulties ; and of course, npt being a 

 practical biologist, I dare not dogmatise in this case. 

 But to myself, as I presume has likewise been the 

 case with a great many readers of Science Gossip, 

 the question naturally suggests itself, " How best to 

 account for these deviations ? " Do they occur 

 through a modification of the pigment cells ? Is there 

 an intensified oxidation of the chromule ? Is there 

 really an absence in the pigment of certain elements 

 essential to the normal colouring? Or are these 

 variations the outcome of a progressive or retrogressive 

 development of colouring-matter ? Pertinent ques- 

 tions these, although such as ought to be partly, if 

 not even wholly, met by the more advanced readers 

 of, and contributors to, these columns. Will they 

 come to our rescue ? I am daily more and more 

 convinced of the importance of the subject, and am 

 certain many others will with myself feel grateful for 

 any light. 



This district is inordinately prolific in the way of 

 white variations. From Bissoe my father has repeat- 

 edly brought pure white specimens' of Calhitta erica, 

 IL?ica cuierca, and E. tetralix, and a few beautiful 

 white heads of Cetitaicrea nigra. From the Lizard 

 I have had huge bunches of Erica vagans brought 

 me, embracing every shade from snowy white to deep 

 purple. My father entertains no doubt at all on the 

 plants he has seen producing white flowers year after 

 year. Some of them he has carefully watched for 

 upwards of twenty years without being able to detect 

 the remotest disposition on their part to return to 

 the normal colour. Ei-ica ciliaris, on the contrary, 

 never produces in this locality any but the rich pink 

 flowers. 



The most peculiar variation coming under my own 

 notice was a low, dwarf-like variety of IVaJilcnbergia 

 hederacea, bearing elegant white flowers, if anything 

 a little more bell-shaped than those of the type-form. 

 The plant cropped up in quantities some five years 



