244 REVIEWS. 



their pollen before the stigma of that blossom is ready to re- 

 ceive it, or by the development and subsequent shrivelling of 

 the stigma before the pollen matures, or by various other 

 arrangements of lilie effect. And here, too, comes in the sig- 

 nificant fact for the evolutionist, that these arrangements be- 

 long to widely different families, but only to certain of their 

 species or groups of species, and not to their near relatives ; 

 also that they are more pronounced in some species than in 

 others. 



Yet, withal, there is much close-fertilization, and no one 

 has demonstrated this better than Mr. Darwin, nor so well 

 illustrated its meaning. The more particular and special the 

 adaptations for cross-fertilization — depending, as they mainly 

 do, ujjon insect-transportation, consequent upon visits for nec- 

 tar or other floral products — the greater the chances of no 

 fertilization through the failure of the proper insect visitation. 

 So nature, not scorning a succedaneum, arranges for self-fer- 

 tilization also as the next best thing, indicating her preference, 

 however, by endowing the pollen with greater potency upon 

 other stigma than its own ; the principle throughout being to 

 place the pollen where it will do the most good, all things 

 considered. But Mr. Darwin insists, apparently with reason, 

 that cross-breeding is the general plan, and close-breeding the 

 subsidiar}'^ proceeding, or at least that no species of flowering 

 plants is deprived of its chance of wide-breeding, or fails to 

 receive the benefit of it for any long number of generations. 



This assumes that wide-breeding is beneficial. The assump- 

 tion is one which a teleologist like Darwin is bound to make, 

 and which an investigator like Darwin is bound to verify, if 

 possible. The assumption is that ends elaborately brought to 

 ])ass in a large nuniber of species, in a variety of ways, and 

 by great nicety and exactness of adaptation, cannot be mean- 

 ingless or useless — must somehow conduce to the well-being 

 of the species. Happily, this inference holds equally good 

 whether, with the old-fashioned teleologist, the word " end " 

 denotes a result aimed at, or, as in Darwinian teleology, a 

 result attained. Tlie two senses arc not contradictory, and, 

 as concerns the validity of the inference, it matters not which 



