102 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



CORRESPONDENCE. 



GETTING EIGHT ON THE EECOED. 



To the Editor of the Popular Science Monthly. 



DEAR SIR : It has always been a mat- 

 ter of surprise to me that some of 

 my contributions to botanical science should 

 be regarded as attacks on the doctrines of 

 Darwin, or as opposed to theories of evolu- 

 tion. At the conclusion of the reading of 

 my papers it is often a subject of argument 

 on which side I stand. So great is this ner- 

 vousness, that at Buffalo, because I showed 

 that the ova-pollen of a yucca-flower was as 

 potent as any that could be brought from 

 another flower by an insect, I had to endure 

 a sharp lecture from Prof. Riley, and even 

 Prof. Morse could only help me with the au- 

 dience by remarking, " We all know that 

 Mr. Meehan is a Darwinian and an evolu- 

 tionist, but must say that he has an odd 

 way of putting it." That my good friend 

 does not regard me as much of either is, 

 however, clear, from his making no refer- 

 ence to any of my labors in his "History 

 of Evolution." 



For my own part I have not cared to be 

 classed nominally with any party in science, 

 but to let the facts I record speak for them- 

 selves. My ambition has been to be con- 

 sidered a worker in the field of original ob- 

 servation and research, and, if I know my- 

 self, am indifferent whether the facts help 

 my own or any other person's beliefs or 

 theories. Still, even an observer must have 

 some idea of the bearing of what he sees 

 on evolution and Darwinism, if he think at 

 all about these things. I have thought it 

 would do no harm if for once I entered the 

 speculative field and put my own interpreta- 

 tion on the facts as I have recorded them. 



Instead of opposing evolution, I think 

 my Hartford paper was a contribution to its 

 cause. I not only showed that in plants 

 there is an evolution of form by slow and 

 gradual modifications through long series 

 of years, but also that evolution is often by 

 sudden leaps, and v that these sudden en- 

 trances were just as permanent, when the 

 agents in natural selection favored, as any 



new form gradually evolved could be. I 

 also showed the probability of whole dis- 

 tricts changing by the operation of some 

 inherent law, which would make the doc- 

 trine of evolution possible to those who 

 can hardly believe every individual in a 

 species came from one primordial form, 

 one exact mathematical centre. Of course, 

 so wide a generalization could not, ought 

 not, to rest on so small a number of facts ; 

 but surely any one can see that if there 

 be, and have been through all ages, change 

 by sudden introductions as well as by slow 

 modifications, there is no use in hunting in 

 all cases for "missing links" that never ex- 

 isted ; and I have found a plank on which 

 Agassiz and his friends might have stood 

 with Darwin ; and I could render no better 

 service to evolutionary views. 



So in reference to cross-fertilization by 

 insect agency, I regard myself as saving 

 Darwinians from themselves. By cutting- 

 out a rotten branch the tree is made health- 

 ier, and the possibility of a fall prevented 

 to those who might crawl out on it. To my 

 mind, there is nothing more opposed to the 

 idea of natural selection than the modern 

 doctrines in relation to insects and fertiliza- 

 tion. Supposing that, in accordance with 

 the inherent tendency to variation, a new 

 form a slight change occurs that ren- 

 ders the plant better fitted to engage in the 

 " struggle for life " than its parent, and that 

 it is unable to make use of its own pollen, 

 but must have pollen by insect agency from 

 some other flower. The advantage it has 

 gained is at once lost, as the crossed prog- 

 eny of course is brought back to near its 

 grandparent, and these again crossed with 

 the foreign pollen are again reduced, till 

 in the course of a few generations the va- 

 riety is near enough to be the same. The 

 effect of continual adding of water to milk 

 is well known. In the supposed case of 

 our plant, it becomes " watered stock " with 

 a vengeance. If the new form could have 

 the power of reproducing itself exactly, aBd 

 thus continue to fix a habit, as we can un- 



