A CRITICISM OF THE CHELL-THEORY. 134 
A Criticism of the Cell-Theory ; being an Answer 
to Mr. Sedgwick’s Article on the Inadequacy 
of the Cellular Theory of Development. 
By 
Gilbert C. Bourne, M.A., F.L.S., 
Fellow of New College, Oxford. 
* Jedes Lebendige ist kein Einzelnes, sondern ein Mehrheit; selbst inso- 
fern es uns als Individuum erscheint, bleibt es doch eine Versammlung von 
lebendigen, selbstandigen Wesen, die der Idee, der Anlage nach gleich sind, 
in der Erscheinung aber gleich oder ahnlich, ungleich oder unahnlich werden 
kénnen. Diese Wesen sind theils urspriinglich schon verbunden, theils finden 
und vereinigen sie sich. Sie entzweien sich und suchen sich wieder, und 
bewirken so eine unendliche Production auf alle Weise und nach allen 
Seiten.”—GortuHE (1807). 
Mr. Avam Sezpewick has of late thrown himself with 
considerable zeal into the part of a zoological iconoclast, and 
has displayed an evident relish in battering the idols which, 
he would fain make us believe, are turning away the minds of 
men from the true faith, of which there are but few orthodox 
exponents. Nor may we blame him for his fervour, for an old 
faith always emerges purer, if not firmer, from the ordeal of 
sharp antagonism. The idols in question are the develop- 
mental law of von Baer and the cell-theory. 
Seeing how important a thing it is that a science should be 
guided by principles capable of being expressed in precise 
language, it has been a matter of surprise to me that some 
competent person has not taken up the challenges which 
Mr. Sedgwick has thrown down. For, if his views are to 
prevail, two of the fundamental principles of zoology, principles 
which have hitherto directed and steadied the course of zoolo- | 
gical speculation, are taken away from us; and unless some 
