WALLACE ON "DARWINISM." 79 



of the phenomena of male ornament as being due to the general laws of growth 

 and development, and make it unnecessary to call to our aid so hypothetical a cause 

 as the cumulative action of female preference.' 



Whether the views put forward by Mr. Wallace do in reality- 

 render unnecessary the Darwinian hypothesis of sexual selection 

 will not be here discussed ; it is sufficient to note that the conclu- 

 sions of Mr. Darwin in this not unimportant matter have, after 

 abundant time for examination and reflection, been rejected by 

 the naturalist who more perhaps than any other has a right to 

 criticise him. 



But Mr. Wallace rejects also the evolutionist views of another 

 very competent naturalist, Prof. Romanes ; and it will aid in the 

 development of the purpose of this paper if I refer in passing to 

 this rejection. The theory of Prof. Romanes is described by him 

 under the phrase physiological selection ; it is not necessary in 

 this place to explain what the theory is ; it is sufficient to say it is 

 regarded as highly important by Prof. Romanes, and as utterly 

 unfounded by Mr. Wallace. It would be impertinent on my part 

 to offer any opinion as between these two authorities; but the 

 conclusion may be fairly drawn that there is probably much at 

 present unknown in the subject of evolution, as well as not a little 

 doubt with regard to some fields of inquiry into which our knowl- 

 edge is supposed to extend. 



But the most striking and interesting feature of Mr. Wallace's 

 book, from what I may describe as the human point of view, is to 

 be found in that part of his work in which he denies, and (as he 

 believes) proves himself to be justified in denying, the application 

 of the principle of natural selection to the evolution of the human 

 faculties. This denial is a fact of the first order of magnitude ; 

 and I confess that I can see no ground for the language of strong 

 depreciation in which Prof. Romanes, in the article already re- 

 ferred to, describes this portion of Mr. Wallace's book. He speaks 

 of the substance of the concluding chapters as being " sadly like 

 the feet of clay in a figure of iron, marring by its manifest 

 weakness what would otherwise have been a completed and self- 

 consistent monument of strength." No argument in the article 

 justifies this condemnation ; and it is, perhaps, not too much to 

 say that many of his readers will find in the condemned portion 

 of Mr. Wallace's book that which has the deepest interest for 

 themselves, while it must not be forgotten that the views put 

 forward are alleged by Mr. Wallace to rest upon proofs which he 

 formally submits for examination. Let us see, then, what this 

 clay formation contains. 



Mr. Wallace fully accepts " Mr. Darwin's conclusion as to the 

 essential identity of man's bodily structure with that of the higher 

 mammalia, and his descent from some ancestral form common to 



