VHality (iiid Organlzdlion of rroioplasm. 13 



each in its Ivind to bo represented in the germ cell. These germinal gem- 

 mules Darwin believed to be thrown otl: by the adult cells at random 

 into the circulation; whereupon an appi'opriate collection of each kind 

 finds eventually its way into every germ cell ; wheref rem is then evolved 

 in due order the respective kinds of cells by means of multiplication 

 through self division of the corresponding gemmules. 



In support of this hypothesis of rej^rodiiction, the consistent logical 

 outcome of the conceptions involved in the cell theory, a number of highly 

 fanciful adjunct hypotheses have to be invented. For no known agency 

 can be imagined competent to collect into germ cells from out the widely 

 scattered chaos of coursing gemmules of all sorts; to collect therefrom 

 an exact assortment representing each separate kind of adult cells. 

 And no know^n agency can furthermore be imagined competent to mar- 

 shal such a reproductive aggregate of gemmules in due order of onto- 

 genetic evolution, so as to make them construct the specifically or- 

 ganized structure of the adult being. Pangenesis, though a legitimate 

 outcome of the cell theory, being thus forced to have recourse to various 

 extravagant adjunct hypotheses, which transcend all legitimate infer- 

 ence, is a theory which has in consequence to be declared untenable. 



With modifications Pangenesis has since served, nevertheless, as a 

 necessary basis, upon which cell theorists have to build in order to ac- 

 count for the phenomena of reproduction. But in their vei'y incep- 

 tion, pangenic theories carry with them their self destruction. For 

 the specific cells from which the hypothetical gemmules are derived 

 have evidently to be first in existence before they can throw off repro- 

 ductive gemmules, and their existence and production can therefore 

 nowise be accounted for by the self-multiplication of gemmules to whose 

 existence and production they themselves give rise; Moreover, it is the 

 ontogenetic reproduction of the divers adult cells which is to be ex- 

 plained, and, surely, it is not the least explained by assuming unexplained 

 the reproduction of their hypothetical germs, to whose multifold re- 

 production they owe their existence. Eeal visible reproduction is here 

 merely hypothetical.ly delegated to the invisible reproduction of hypo- 

 thetical units, without the least attempt to show in what reproduction 

 itself really consists. 



Pangenesis is obviously laboring under insuperable difficulties by 

 building upon the cell theory as a given basis, and it ends by destroying 

 this very basis, from which it confidently starts. For cells, according to 

 the cell theory, accepted by Pangenesis, are declared to be autonomous 

 beings. In fact Pangenesis rests on this supposition. But how can the 

 cells be autonomous beings when Pangenesis itself is forced to dissolve 

 them info clusters of self multiplying gemmules? In keeping with 

 the hypothesis, cells can indeed consist of nothing but aggregates of 

 self -multi plied gemmules, and are therefore not autonomous beings. 



According to Darwdn's hypothesis the expected ontogenetic result 

 would, however, be attained only if the substance of the cells, which are 

 supposed to throw off reproductive gemmules w^ould be homogeneous 



