^40 THE MENDEL JOURNAL 



of the doctrine. Then conies the most interesting and central 

 part of the Lecture. Essentially it is a consideration of the 

 nature of the germ-plasm as we can elucidate it by our knowledge 

 of experimental Embryology. This part of the Address is not 

 long, but it is very clear and is illustrated by several figures. 

 It is moreover of great importance on account of the light which 

 it casts upon the nature of tlie germinal substance. It should be 

 read by every statesman, politician, social reformer, and philan- 

 thropist. 



The central feature of the embryological experiments here 

 described is that what the organism wijl become, depends not on 

 the environment, but on the nature and constitution of the 

 germ-plasm. Let it be remembered, this is not an assertion, 

 not a conception born of emotion, not a daughter-expectation 

 begotten of a father-wish, but a simple, demonstrable fact 

 observed and always to be observed, in the experimental labora- 

 tory. It was ascertained yesterday, it can be verified to-morrow. 



Professor Bourne speaks not as a Sociologist but as a Zoologist. 

 His attitude to social problems— which inevitably Zoology must 

 trench upon — is indicated in the following sentence : "It is not 

 the business of a zoologist to offer solutions of social questions. 

 But he is within his right if he tenders to those whose business 

 it is to study these questions such evidence as is relevant.'" We 

 are not altogether in agreement with this attitude. It seems to 

 us that those who can best solve social problems are they whose 

 work and experience have brought them into contact with the 

 actual foundations upon which they rest. We do not say 

 biologists are the only persons who can approach them. But we 

 do think that the certainty of experience and the strength of 

 conviction which arise as the outcome of first-hand knowledge of 

 life in its widest manifestation are essential to a full, a right, and 

 a fearless understanding of these difficult questions. Doubtless 

 there may be room for two classes of biologists : those who decide 

 to remain in the calm and dispassionate air of the laboratory 

 and those who prefer to enter the complex arena of human life 

 outside, and to apply their academic knowledge and experience 

 to the questions which there arise. There is an advantage 

 certainly in such a subdivision. It may be that the conclusions 

 of those who have brought their biological knowledge to bear 

 upon human affairs, may be the more readily accepted by Society 

 generally, if they are supported by the evidence of those biologists 

 who have stood outside the strife and heat of the arena, where 

 scientific knowledge and method must inevitably come into 

 conflict with partisanship, and with those preconceived ideas 

 upon the rise or fall of which. Schools and Creeds rest their 

 existence. 



