C72 APPENDIX B. 



More than once T have pointed out that, as influencing men s 

 views about Education, Ethics, Sociology, and Politics, the ques 

 tion whether acquired characters are inherited is the most im 

 portant question before the scientific world. Hence I cannot 

 allow the discussion with Professor Weismann to end in so futile 

 a way as it will do if no summary of results is made. Here, 

 therefore, I propose to recapitulate the whole case in brief. Pri 

 marily my purpose is to recall certain leading propositions which, 

 having been passed by unnoticed, remain outstanding. I will 

 turn, in the second place, to such propositions as have been dealt 

 with ; hoping to show that the replies given are invalid, and con 

 sequently that these propositions also remain outstanding. 



But something beyond a summing-up is intended. A few 

 pages at the close will be devoted to setting forth new evidence 

 which has come to light since the controversy commenced evi 

 dence which many will think sufficient in itself to warrant a posi 

 tive conclusion. 



Tne fact that the tip of the fore finger has thirty times the 

 power of discrimination possessed by the middle of the back, 

 and that various intermediate degrees of discriminative power 

 are possessed by various parts of the skin, was set down as a 

 datum for my first argument. The causes which might be as 

 signed for these remarkable contrasts were carefully examined 

 under all their aspects. I showed in detail that the contrasts 

 could not in any way be accounted for by natural selection. I 

 further showed that no interpretation of them is afforded by the 

 alleged process of panmixia: this has no locus standi in the case. 

 Having proved experimentally, that ability of the fingers to dis 

 criminate is increased by practice, and having pointed out that 

 gradations of discriminativeness in different parts correspond with 

 gradations in the activities of the parts as used for tactual ex 

 ploration, I argued that these contrasts have arisen from the 

 organized and inherited effects of tactual converse with surround 

 ing things, varying in its degrees according to the positions of 

 the parts in other words, that they are due to the inheritance 

 of acquired characters. As a crowning proof I instanced the case 

 of the tongue-tip, which has twice the discriminativeness of the 

 forefinger-tip : pointing out that consciously, or semi-consciously, 

 or unconsciously, the tongue-tip is perpetually exploring the inner 

 surfaces of the teeth. 



Singling out this last case, Professor Weismann made, or 

 rather adopted from Dr. Romanes, what professed to be a reply 

 but was nothing more than the blank form of a reply. It was 

 said that though this extreme discriminativeness of the tongue- 

 tip is of no use to mankind, it may have been of use to certain 



