77 



the biogenetic principle is not a general law." 

 But if it be not a ''general law," how does 

 Father Wasmann know that in his own par 

 ticular discovery (!) he has "a clue to the evo 

 lution of the species"? Why should it prove 

 to be the law in his case and not in that of 

 others? There are those who maintain that 

 they, too, have discovered instances of it and 

 those also who insist that it is a general law. 

 Why should Father Wasmann be so confident 

 of its import in his own case and so positive in 

 his rejection of it in other cases ? Why should 

 he be so certain that he has come upon a real 

 case of parallel between ontogenesis and phy 

 logenesis ? Indeed, Father Wasmann's atti 

 tude here is wholly capricious and, in spite of 

 all his protestations, can only be interpreted as 

 a confirmation of their position by those who 

 maintain the validity of the biogenetic princi 

 ple. Indeed, we think the admonition of the 

 nursery rhyme, "The gobbeluns'll get you if 

 you don't watch out," is particularly appro 

 priate for Father Wasmann on this particular 

 point. For the rest we are sorry to find Father 

 Wasmann lending himself to an effort to revive 



