NEOLAMARCKISM 415 
strictest sense of the term, that natural selection is 
not wanted as an ‘aid’ or a‘ means’ in originating 
species.’’ In a later paper* he reasserts that all 
variations are definite, that there are no indefinite 
variations, and that natural selection ‘‘ can take no 
part in the origination of varieties.’’ He quotes 
with approval the conclusion of Mr. Herbert Spencer 
in 1852, published 
“seven years before Darwin and Dr. Wallace 
superadded natural selection as an aid in the origin 
of species. He saw no necessity for anything be- 
yond the natural power of change with adaptation; 
and I venture now to add my own testimony, based 
upon upwards of a quarter of a century’s observa- 
tions and experiments, which have convinced me 
that Mr. Spencer was right and Darwin was wrong. 
His words are as follows: ‘ The supporters of the 
development hypothesis can show . . ._ that 
any existing species, animal or vegetable, when 
placed under conditions different from its previous 
ones, immediately begins to undergo certain changes 
of structure fitting it for the newconditions; . . . 
that in the successive generations these changes con- 
tinue until ultimately the new conditions become the 
naturalones. . . . They can show that through- 
out all organic nature there is at work a modifying 
influence of the kind they assign as the causes of 
specific differences; an influence which, though slow 
in its action, does in time, if the circumstances de- 
mand it, produce marked changes.’ ”’ + 
Mr. Henslow adduces observations and experi- 
ments by Buckman, Bailey, Lesage, Lothelier, Cos- 
* “ Does Natural Selection play any Part in the Origin of Species 
among Plants?” Matural Science, Sept., 1897. 
Her Essay on the Development Hypothesis,” 1852, London 7%mes. 
