302 Darwin and Pangenesis. [ July, 
triumph over an unfortunate “ Darwinian” by daring him to 
admit that he believes a Christian and a bull to have had the same 
ancestry ! 
But with the exception of a few thinking observers—the measure 
of whose information is only exceeded by their caution, which pre- 
vents them from accepting the new theory—the large majority of 
its opponents are really such reasoners as we have described; and 
it appears to us that the acceptance of the theory will depend 
more upon the decline of superstition than upon the ascendancy of 
knowledge. 
To return, however, to our difficulties. Another feature in the 
theory of modification of species which presents evidence for as well 
as against the doctrine of “natural selection” is the inheritance of 
peculiarities. 
In his ‘Origin of Species’* the author said:—“'The laws 
governing inheritance are quite unknown: no one can say why 
a peculiarity in different individuals of the same species, or in 
individuals of different species, is sometimes inherited and some- 
times not so, why the child often reverts in certain characters to its 
grandfather or grandmother, or more remote ancestor.” But as 
we stated in our criticism already referred to, this very ignorance 
of the causes of inheritance presents a grave obstacle to acceptance of 
the doctrine of modification through the external conditions of life ; 
for what can that power have effected “where the deceased father is 
resembled by a posthumous child?” + Had such inherited pecu- 
liarities been mental only, they might have resulted from early 
training; but if we take a case which is not unusual, that the 
grandchild by a daughter of the grandfather resembles the latter 
both in features and character, then we have the mental and 
physical peculiarities of a male transmitted through two females, 
the mother and daughter. 
The mode in which we sought to explain such a wonderful. 
phenomenon, and one, as it appeared to us, then at variance with 
the author’s views, was that “from the very commencement of 
life up to the present hour there are evidences of an ¢mmediate 
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 
the force may be called which influences the embryo and the born 
creature.{ ‘The justification we have for quoting these few expres- 
sions of our own, is that to a large extent the author seems to have 
* P. 13, 8th edition. 
+ “ Darwin and his Teachings :” ‘Journal of Science,’ vol. iii., p. 174. 
¢ Ibid., p. 174, 
