288 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE 
these ontogenetic adaptations. This takes the place 
of the Lamarckian factor. Lamarckism is an “ obvious ” 
resort in all cases, of course, but it seems to me so easy, 
that in many cases it is shallow in the extreme. 
But my view is very far from being Weismannism. 
I reach determinate variations by means of new 
functions or adaptions which keep certain animals 
alive to propagate. It is really a new theory, as Prof. 
Osborn, who has reached about the same point of view, 
declares. This is also just the value which Prof. 
Morgan attaches to his observations. 
J. Mark BALDWIN. 
PRINCETON, 17th April 1896. 
To THE Epiror oF Science—It seems to me that it 
would be well to keep the issue with which this 
discussion started in view, and then the direction in 
which the truth lies will be clearer. Nothing could 
be more explicit than the statement by “The Writer 
of the Note” in Science of 14th February, which was 
this: “A chick will peck instinctively, but must be 
taught to drink. Chicks have learned to drink for 
countless generations, but the acquired action has not 
become instinctive.” 
In other words, the view that eating is instinctive, 
and drinking is not, was that taught by Prof. Morgan 
and endorsed by “The Writer of the Note” in a sub- 
sequent communication. Feeling that an important 
truth was being imperilled, I advanced facts to show 
that such a view was untenable. This was followed 
by the recital of additional facts by others, so that it 
was plain to myself—more so than ever—that such a 
theory as that first advanced was not sound. I was 
aware that all three of the writers supporting this view 
