THE DOGMA OF EVOLUTION 



resolves itself, and by means of which the physio- 

 logical division of labour is effected. "^^ It would seem 

 clear from the above that he is certain that the life 

 and habits of an adult organism cannot be deciphered 

 or predicted by any study of the primitive cell of the 

 ovum. But not at all : when a specific case of heredity 

 is brought to his attention, he immediately returns 

 confidently to "them there bags of mysteree," the cells. 

 To explain why certain flies develop certain future 

 characteristics, he says : "This case, and many others of 

 similar type, may be completely explained through our 

 knowledge of the relation of the chromosomes to sex. 

 . . . All the facts revealed by experiment are very 

 simply and completely accounted for by the sitnple 

 assumption that the X-chromosome is responsible not 

 only for sex, but also for the short-winged charac- 

 ter."^^ And all Professor Wilson really knows about 

 the X-chromosome is that it is a minute speck in the 

 cell which can be seen under a microscope when an 

 ovum has been stained. But if Professor Wilson and 

 other biologists sin by saying that they understand 

 what they do not, the most unpardonable case is that 

 of Professor Ritter, himself, who writes a long and 

 difBcult treatise to overthrow the cell-theory and with 

 it the materialistic theory of life, and then, in the 

 end, proposes a new and crude materialistic theory in 

 these words: "All the manifestations which in the 

 aggregate we call life, from those presented by the 



28 The Unity of the Organism, vol. I, p. l6l. 

 "^^Ibid., vol. I, p. 163. 



[288] 



