BIONOMICS 267 



complete than an organism in which this power is dependent on the aid 

 of another organism, is more individual. 



In pursuance of his conception of life, however (which, as 

 we remember, tacitly implies an "inner nature"), Spencer 

 finally inclines to the view as regards individuality that "we 

 must record the title to each separate aphis, each polype of a 

 polypedom, each bud or shoot of a flowering plant, whether it 

 detaches itself as a bulbil or remains attached as a branch." 



If the bud be thus considered as a biological individual, 

 and if, as we have seen, without the presence of a bud repro- 

 duction will not proceed, we can see again how greatly 

 reproduction depends on individuality, and how not only 

 reproduction but, in fact, all biological production must 

 depend on individuality, i.e., on personality and character, 

 however incipient. 



I.ADAPTA TION. 



As this subject and a great part of Spencer's chapter 

 thereon have already been treated, it remains to say something 

 about a modern view concerning adaptation. 



The well-known view of the Rev. Prof. G. Henslow is that 

 of " Self-Adaptation to Changed Conditions of Life," i.e., 

 that the adaptations of plants, for instance, are not, as 

 Darwin's theory might lead one to suppose, a mere matter of 

 " accident," but that the structural peculiarities of plants can 

 often be proved by induction and experiments to be the inciting 

 causes to which the plant responds, and builds up the very 

 tissues which are requisite for the occasion. 



In other words, this means that plants, in making their 

 adaptations behave much as human beings would, i.e., that 

 they show individuality, a view to which, of course, we offer 

 no objection. Prof. Henslow opines that Nature herself is 

 frequently making experiments, which seems a round-about 

 and paradoxical way of expressing what is really to be con- 

 veyed, viz., that organisms must remain adaptive to changes 

 of season and of circumstances, much in the same way as this 

 is required of man in his changing circumstances. I fail to 

 see any gain of clearness in the repeated attempt to impute to 



