9© Darwin, and after Darwin. 



although this cannot be said of the moral sense when 

 the theory of natural selection is extended from the 

 individual to the tribe, still, when we remember the 

 extraordinary complexity and refinement to which 

 they have attained in civilized man, we may well 

 doubt whether they can have been due to natural 

 selection alone. But space forbids discussion of this 

 large and important question on the present occasion. 

 Suffice it therefore to say, that I doubt not VVeismann 

 himself would be the first to allow that his theory of 

 heredity encounters greater difficulties in the domain 

 of ethics than in any other — unless, indeed, it be that 

 of religion ^ 



I have now given a brief sketch of the indirect 

 evidence in favour of the so-called Lamarckian factors, 

 in so far as this appears fairly deducible from the 

 facts of reflex action and of instinct. It will now be 

 my endeavour to present as briefly what has to be said 

 against this evidence. 



As previously observed, the facts of reflex action 

 have not been hitherto adduced in the present con- 

 nexion. This has led me to occupy considerably 

 more space in the treatment of them than those of 

 instinct. On this account, also, there is here nothing 

 to quote, or to consider, per contra. On the other 

 hand, however, Weismann has himself dealt with the 

 phenomena of instinct in animals, though not I think. 

 in man— if we except his brilliant essay on music. 

 Therefore let us now begin this division of our 



' For an excellent essay on the deleterious character of early forms of 

 religion from a biological point of view, see the lion. Lidy Welby, An 

 Apparent Paradox in AJental Evolution [^]o\iTn. Anihro^. Inst. May 1891). 



