200 THE MENDEL JOURNAL 



exploded hypotheses is something which men of science 

 regret and only reluctantly tolerate. But it" is only just 

 to remember that scientific men themselves look upon 

 this relegation of untenable hypotheses to the scrap-heap 

 as a quite normal event in the affairs of science. And, 

 similarly, they regard the birth of new hypotheses even from a 

 frail parentage, so long as it be legitimate, as a normal event. 

 There is no danger in the existence of these hypotheses in the 

 world of science, because no delusion is there associated with 

 them ; men of science understand them and appreciate their 

 nature. It is only when they pass into the hands of men who are 

 not scientific and who endeavour to use them to support their 

 own prejudices or desires that they become dangerous, because 

 they then become misapplied. 



These so-called speculations in- science are never intended to 

 be infallible dogmas ; no scientific man ever makes that pre- 

 tence. They are simply working hypotheses or necessary imple- 

 ments of work, without the use of which it is impossible to advance. 

 They are not Laws, but merely instruments of scientific research. 

 When the work which they are intended to fashion and to mould 

 is accomplished, these instruments of achievements — the working 

 hypotheses — ^are cast aside. They have fulfilled their function, 

 and science cannot be retarded by retaining implements which are 

 no longer capable of useful work. In Biology we see one such 

 derelict scientific tool in ■ the now almost generally discarded 

 hypothesis of the hereditary transmission of acquired 

 characters. This hypothesis in its time served a very useful 

 purpose. Had it nevei' been called into use, biological science 

 in certain of her problems would have stood sixty years 

 behind the position she now occupies. In a tentative way 

 and to a hniited degree, Darwin utilised it as a working 

 instrument, and his use of it ultimately led other biolo- 

 gists, and especially Weismann, to subject it to a searching 

 inductive and deductive analysis, based partly upon experiment 

 and partly upon verified observation. And as a consequence 

 of such work — the outcome, let it be emphasized, of the critical 

 use of a scientific hypothesis — the large majority of biologists 

 to-day feel justified in relegating this hypothesis to the " scrap- 

 heap." We need no longer encumber our path and retard our 

 progress by futile discussions and unrewarded experiments on 

 the " yea " or " nay " of the transmission of acquired characters. 

 And when we look into the realm of Medicine — which is but 

 applied Biology — we can conceive what an immense impetus to 

 progress it must be for medical investigators and pioneers of 

 knowledge, scouting out into the unknown regions, to know that 

 this particular tool can no longer accomplish any useful work for 



