200 THE MENDEL JOURNAL 



Clearly, the Editor of " Biometrika " and his biometrical 

 contributor do not see " eye to eye." But, apart from a 

 consideration of this sort. Dr. Pearl does not anywhere 

 in his original paper allude to gametic types among single 

 combs. But what he does allude to are " variants." 

 Now " variants," as used in the biometrical language 

 of Dr. Pearl's paper, are w^holly somatic, and not gametic, 

 in conception. Whatever conceptions Dr. Pearl may have 

 had in mind, certainly the gametic ones were not expressed 

 in his original memoir. Perhaps in the shadow of the 

 Biometrical " Field Marshal " they froze at their incep- 

 tion, and they awaited the more genial atmosphere of the 

 " Mendel Journal," for their fruition. 



Dr. Pearl seems to imply (p. 193) that we have 

 attributed to him views regarding heredity which he does 

 not hold. If we understand him rightly, and have 

 correctly followed his context, Dr. Pearl appears to think 

 that w^e have ascribed to him a belief in the biometrical 

 "Law of Ancestral Inheritance." We should be exceedingly 

 sorry to attribute to anyone beliefs which they do not 

 hold. We can quite sympathise with Dr. Pearl's anxiety 

 to be dissociated from that burning and blackening 

 chestnut of the biometrical harvest. But surely it is a 

 httle ungenerous to seek an opportunity of discarding 

 a fallen idol and a shattered faith by accusing us of 

 statements which we have not made. We have nowhere 

 attributed to Dr. Pearl a belief in any theory of 

 inheritance. His methods, his statements, his conclusions, 

 and his material were criticised, but nothing more. The 

 fact that Dr. Pearl has spoken of our "mihtant rhetoric " 

 and of the " Law of Ancestral Inheritance " suggests to 

 us that he has confused together two distinct articles, 

 namely, " The Present Position of the Mendelians and 

 Biometricians " and the one entitled " Variation in the 

 Single Combs of Fowls ; some Mendelian Comments." 

 In the latter, no " militant rhetoric " of any sort occurs, 

 and the " Law of Ancestral Inheritance " is not 

 mentioned. In the former article, which does not deal 

 with Dr. Pearl, the author of this Law is mentioned, 

 and the article was advisedly written in the style of 

 martial imagery. But it was not intended that the 

 cap should fit Dr. Pearl. Of course, if he should like 



