356 THE STUDY OF EVOLUTION 



certain cases happen to be so, but on the other hand it may have no 

 such quality. Such a modification may be destructive of the life of 

 the organism, or it may be disadvantageous rather than adaptive, 

 or it may be, so to speak, neutral and without significance. Such 

 specific modifications in the case of the simplest living matter have, 

 it seems probable, never been directly adaptive, but some of the 

 many modifications so set up would, under some of the many further 

 changes of environment, prove of value in the struggle for existence 

 to the primitively simple living thing so modified, and would lead 

 to its survival by natural selection. This is called by Mr. Herbert 

 Spencer " adaptation by indirect equilibration " as contrasted with 

 " adaptation by direct equilibration." I need not pursue the subject 

 further. It is sufficiently clear that Dr. Adami is under the illusion 

 that mere modification of an organism in response to change of 

 environment is described by the term " direct adaptation," which 

 it is not. Accordingly in this case also, as in regard to the words 

 " variation " and " variability," he misunderstands what other 

 people have said on the subject on which he lectures, and, in con- 

 sequence, solemnly gives utterance to propositions which have no 

 serious meaning. 



(d) Dr. Adami proceeds to maintain that the retention of its 

 changed character by a strain of experimentally modified bacteria 

 multiplying by fission is an example of the " transmission " of an 

 acquired character. He is probably aware that it is very widely 

 admitted that no case of the transmission of what are called 

 " acquired ' ' characters from parent to offspring has been demon- 

 strated in so far as those higher animals and plants which multiply 

 by means of specialized egg cells and sperm cells are concerned. 

 The well-known retention of induced change of character in very 

 simple fissiparous organisms does not go far towards rendering it 

 probable that transmission occurs in the case of elaborate multi- 

 cellular organisms with specialized reproductive cells. Dr. Adami 

 offers us a dissertation on the word " individuality," which is of no 

 assistance in the matter, and later proceeds to state that Weismann 

 " violently opposed " the doctrine of the transmission of acquired 

 characters. This is a baseless charge. Weismann was a patient 

 investigator, and anything but a " violent " controversialist. He 

 came to the conclusion that not only had no case of such trans- 

 mission on the part of higher organisms been demonstrated, but that 

 the mode of development and structure of the reproductive cells was 

 such as to make it improbable that such transmission could be 

 brought about. Nevertheless, Weismann would have examined 

 fairly and judicially any attempted demonstration by a competent 

 investigator of an instance of the transmission of such characters, 

 and so at any time would the " academic biologists " of this country. 

 Weismann would not have been interested in Dr. Adami's recent 



