BAWDEN, Psychological Theory of Evolution. 271. 
accordance with this view the automatic ‘involuntary’ move- 
ments of the heart, intestines, réproductive systems, etc., were 
organized in primitive and simple animals in successive states 
of consciousness, which stimulated ‘voluntary’ movements, 
which ultimately became rhythmic ; whose results varied with 
the machinery already existing andthe material at hand for 
use. It is not inconceivable that circulation may have been 
established by the suffering produced by an overloaded stomach 
demanding distribution of its contents. The structure of the 
Infusoria offers the conditions of such a process. A want of 
propulsion ina stomach or body-sack occupied with its own 
functions would lead toa painful clogging of the flow of its 
products, and the ‘voluntary’ contractility of the body or tube- 
wall being thus stimulated, would at some point originate the 
pulsation necessary to relieve the tension. Thus might have 
originated the ‘contractile vesicle’ or contractile tube of 
some Protozoa; its ultimate product being the mammalian heart. 
So with reproduction. Perhaps an excess of assimilation in 
well-fed individuals of the first animals led to the discovery that 
self-division constituted a relief from the oppression of too 
great bulk. With the increasing specialization of form, this 
process would become necessarily localized in the body, and 
growth would repeat such resulting structure in descent as 
readily as any of the other structural peculiarities. No function 
of the higher animals bears the mark of conscious origin more 
than this one, as consciousness is still one of the conditions of 
its performance. While less completely ‘voluntary’ than mus- 
cular action, it is more dependent on stimulus for its initial 
movements, and does not in these display the unconscious auto- 
matism characteristic of many other functions.”’? 
If this theory is sound, then all that Hux ery has to say 
about animal automatism and all that Professor Lorn urges from 
the side of animal tropisms may be true (so far as the facts are 
concerned) and still not be incompatible with our theory of the 
evolution of consciousness. For, from this point of view, tro- 
I Ibid. p: 517: 
