THE PRESENT POSITION OF CELL-THEORY. 309 



Most of the experiments of Wilson, Hertwig and 

 Driesch were of a different kind. They isolated the blas- 

 tomeres by gentle shaking. Driesch is very careful to say 

 gentle ; rough shaking destroyed the individual blastomeres. 

 Things which are so loosely united as to be separated thus 

 easily from one another scarcely suggest the nature of a 

 coherent protoplasmic mass. 



The criticism falls entirely to the ground and one can 

 only wonder how any one could have had the temerity to 

 make it. The very objections urged to my views are but 

 additional evidence in support of them, and I was well 

 aware that the evidence existed when I wrote, but I had to 

 be as brief as possible, and did not refer to it. My state- 

 ment that it is very clearly established that there are 

 numerous cases in which there is not "a primitive con- 

 tinuity which has never been broken" is abundantly 

 justified. Mr. Sedgwick wonders why I emphasised the 

 distinction and complete isolation of the cells formed by 

 the segmentation of the egg. The reason is surely clear 

 enough. Because he suggested, in no uncertain manner in 

 his earlier writings, that the connections between adult cells 

 were due to a primitive continuity which had never been 

 broken, and that those who urged that such connections 

 were secondary were in the wrong. This suggestion was 

 contrary to fact, and it was my object to show that it was. 

 I did not contradict myself when I stated immediately 

 afterwards that the organism cannot be considered to consist 

 of independent life units, for I went on to show that the 

 cell-republic theory is also contrary to fact, and must there- 

 fore be condemned. If a contradiction exists, it exists in 

 nature, and after we have ascertained the facts the next 

 thing is to try to explain this seeming contradiction. Mr. 

 Sedgwick says that he does not think it possible to do so, 

 until we acquire some more understanding of the relative 

 functions of nuclei and protoplasm. Possibly he is right, 

 yet I think that an attempt may be made, and if the explana- 

 tion is after all not very satisfactory yet some service may 

 be done, for we may arrive at more distinct ideas about 

 fundamental points, and we must gain much by a careful 



