THE THEORY OF USE-INHERITANCE: T71 
In this state of doubt, it is worth while to ask whether 
psychical facts, taken by themselves, confirm the 
hypothesis of use-inheritance. There is no longer atiy 
excuse for the prejudice that a negative answer must be 
hostile to the doctrine of evolution. Whatever may, or may 
not, be the effect of habits acquired in the lifetime of an 
individual, we may still believe in the development of psychi- 
cal life, the higher susceptibilities and powers having been 
superimposed on the lower. : 
The influence of heredity is too patent to be denied, 
though it may be variously estimated. In the beginning 
of the nineteenth century, the prevailing tendency was to 
make too much of the levelling’ power of education, and too 
little of the original differences between individuals and 
races ; towards the close of the century it had become the 
fashion to exalt nature unduly over nurture. Recently, the 
pendulum has been swaying back again; greater importance 
is now attached to the life-history of the individual; and the 
new century opens with brighter hopes for the prevention 
of disease and vice, in spite of an adverse heredity. Nur- 
ture, however, can work only on the materials which nature 
has given, and which, to no slight extent, are inherited from 
past generations. It is interesting to watch the qualities of 
parents repeated in their children, or to trace peculiarities 
back to grandparents, or remoter ancestors. And when any 
one resembles one or both of his parents in some particular 
trait, it may easily be supposed that this is due, in part, to a 
habit which was formed before he was born, and which has 
influenced him through heredity. The father, for instance, 
may have fostered in himself a generous or a grudgmg 
habit; the son follows in his steps, and becomes beneficent 
or penurious. But there is no evidence here of the inherit- 
ance of an acquired character. The constitution of the 
child may have been similar to that with which his father 
began, requiring only the incitement of circumstances to 
evolve a similar habit ; nor can we overlook in such cases the 
effects of precept and example. It is not uncommon to find 
a son resembling his father in being extravagant in his 
youth and covetous in his old age. This is easily under- 
stood if we suppose both to begin with a similar constatu- 
tion; the tendency to covetousness may be latent, like the 
tendency to gout or obesity, or it may follow by way of 
revulsion from the consequences of extravagance. But I 
am not aware of any facts which show that a son born in 
the extravagant period is likely to be more extrava- 
gant than a son born when the covetous period 
