174 Darwin and his Teachings. [ April, 
of every shade of opinion, whether this isnot what the illustrious 
naturalist himself so often calls, when he refers to the theories of his 
opponents, a restatement of facts. And where was the necessity for 
the very existence of the sexual elements at all? What “law” of 
nature created these? We know that many of the lowest types of 
animals can and do multiply rapidly and effectively by fission (sub- 
division of their bodies) and gemmation (budding); and we know, 
too, not the least so from the wonderful array of facts collected by 
this most untiring observer, that the pivot upon which the whole 
question of animal progress turns, is Just this one of sexual pecu- 
harities! From the very commencement of life wp to the present hour, 
there are evidences of an dvmediate designing power—or, to use 
a term which is looked upon with disfavour by many Darwinians, 
an ordaining Power; an occult influence in the production and 
modification of the sexual elements, and consequently of the beings 
springing from them, totally distinct from the “conditions of 
existence,” “natural selection,” or whatever else the force may be 
called, which influences the embryo and the born creature. How 
often is it that the deceased father is resembled by his posthumous 
offspring? Had it been the mother, this might be explained by 
the conditions of gestation; but to what is it to be attributed in 
the case of the father? Is there anything in Darwin’s law—is 
there not something beyond “atavism,’ or “the hereditary trans- 
mission” of peculiarities (phrases themselves implying ignorance, 
not knowledge, of natural laws and operations), which causes this 
constantly-recurring miracle connected with the conception of living 
creatures ? 
But the facts of embryology afford very striking evidence im 
favour of the origin of species by modified descent, and undoubtedly 
the surrounding conditions of existence have great influence upon 
the growth of the embryo. The resemblances between the feetal 
stages of the individuals of different species, too, lend additional 
probability to the same doctrme; but whoever has the smallest 
acquaintance with Comparative Embryology must know that what- 
ever value its facts may present in enabling us to judge the question 
under consideration, they apply equally to Man and to the lower 
animals. 
It is not surprising that when Darwin comes to treat of instincts, 
he should find in their study but little in favour of his theory of 
Natural Selection. Still he believes that the latter has the power “of 
accumulating slight modifications of instinct to any extent in any 
direction ;”* and judging by analogy, that is, when we compare this 
with similar language relating to the modification of the structure 
of animals, we should be justified in inferrmg that he believes 
natural selection to be capable of framing the minds of animals. On 
* Origin of Species,’ p. 229, par. 3; p. 265, par. 2. 
Shia 
bare 
