142 



NATURE 



\yune 12, 1879 



survival of the fittest, nor of the important part it neces- 

 sarily plays in the accumulation and perpetuation of varia- 

 tions, however these may be caused. In this respect he 

 was probably not so enlightened as Buffon. 



Lamarck's \iTitings are very largely quoted and his 

 opinions fully illustrated ; and we freely admit with Mr. 

 Butler that, as a thorough and consistent evolutionist, he 

 was not inferior to Mr. Darwin himself. But although 

 he clearly saw the fact of evolution, and almost demon- 

 strated the reality of the fact by a variety of arguments 

 and a wealth of observation, yet, so far from adducing 

 any adequate causes for evolution, he was actually inferior 

 to his predecessors Buiifon and Dr. Erasmus Darwin, 

 since he appears to have had no glimpse of the way in 

 which domestic races have actually been produced by 

 human selection, and still less of the action of the 

 law of the survival of the fittest on animals and plants 

 in a state of nature. Everything he imputes to changed 

 conditions and changed habits, developing new desires in 

 animals and inducing new courses of action. He dwells 

 much on the time required for these changes, and consi- 

 ders that we have a practically unlimited amount at our 

 disposal, remarking that " a time infinitely great qua man 

 is still infinitely short qua nature." 



Lamarck is exceedingly vague in his statements as to 

 the cause and mode of change. After describing the 

 different kinds of locomotion, walking, leaping, flying, 

 swimming, and the great need of these powers of move- 

 ment to most animals, he adds : " Since, then, the power 

 of locomotion was a matter affecting their individual self- 

 preservation, as well as that of their race, the existence of 

 the want led to the means of its being gratified." He 

 does not seem to have perceived the struggle between in- 

 dividuals of the same species owing to their excessive 

 numbers, but only the struggle between distinct races ; as 

 when he says : " The strongest and best armed for attack 

 eat the weaker, and the greater kinds the smaller. Indi- 

 viduals of the same race rarely eat one another ; they war 

 only with other races than their own." He also refers to 

 the excessive multiplication of the smaller kinds of 

 animals, and shows how their numbers are limited, but he 

 never observed that the race was thereby invigorated and 

 might even be modified. He sums up his theory in the 

 following three propositions : — 



" I. That every considerable and sustained change in 

 the surroundings of any animal involves a real change in 

 its needs. 



" 2. That such change of needs involves the necessity 

 of changed action in order to satisfy these needs, and, in 

 consequence, of new habits. 



" 3. It follows that such and such parts, formerly less 

 used, are now more frequently employed, and in conse- 

 quence become more highly developed ; new parts also 

 become insensibly evolved in the creature by its own 

 efforts from within." 



These arguments are repeated in a variety of ways, and 

 are applied to explain the origin of all our breeds of dogs 

 and other domestic animals, as well as of all wild species ; 

 and he evidently had no notion that though these may be 

 real causes, they would be utterly inadequate to produce 

 any such effects as we see in nature without the accumu- 

 lating power of natural selection. Mr. Butler, indeed, 

 maintains that this power is implied in Lamarck's reason- 



ing. He maintains " that one [of the most important 

 conditions of an animal's life is the relation in which it 

 stands to the other inhabitants of the same neighbour- 

 hood — from which the survival of the fittest follows as a 

 self-evident proposition." And he adds : " Lamarck would 

 not have hesitated to admit that, if animals are modified 

 in a direction which is favourable to them, they will have 

 a better chance of surviving and transmitting their favour- 

 able modifications." 



But it is clear that Lamarck neither saw it nor admitted 

 it ; and his theory is therefore radically deficient. And 

 he evidently sees this deficiency himself, for he says that 

 frequent crosses with unmodified individuals will destroy 

 the effect produced, and that therefore isolation is 

 necessary. 



We come next to Mr. Patrick Matthew, who in 1831 

 put forth his views on the development theory in a work 

 on arboriculture ; and we think that most naturalists will 

 be amazed at the range and accuracy of his system, and 

 will give him the highest credit as the first to see the im- 

 portant principles of human and "natural selection," 

 conformity to conditions, and reversion to ancestral types ; 

 and also the unity of life, the varying degrees of individu- 

 ality, and the continuity of ideas or habits forming an 

 abiding memory, thus combining all the best essential 

 features of the theories put forth by Lamarck, Darwin, 

 and Mr. Butler himself. The following quotations illus- 

 trate Mr. Matthews's views : — " As the field of existence is 

 hmited and preoccupied, it is only the hardier, more 

 robust, better-suited-to-circumstance individuals who are 

 able to struggle forward to maturity, these inhabiting only 

 the situations to which they have superior adaptation and 

 greater power of occupancy than any other kind ; the 

 weaker and less circumstance,-suited being prematurely 

 destroyed. This principle is in constant action ; it regu- 

 lates the colour, the figure, the capacities, and instincts ; 

 those individuals in each species whose colour and cover- 

 ing are best suited to concealment or protection from 

 enemies, or defence from inclemencies or vicissitudes of 

 climate, whose figure is best accommodated to health, 

 strength, defence, and support ; in such immense waste 

 of primary and youthful life those only come forward to 

 maturity from the strict ordeal by which nature tests their 

 adaptation to her standard of perfection and fitness to 

 continue their kind by reproduction." He then goes on 

 to show how this law tends to the production of almost 

 uniform groups of individuals which we term species, and 

 then adds : " This circumstance-adaptive law operating 

 upon the slight but continued natural disposition to sport 

 in the progeny, does not preclude the supposed influence 

 which volition or sensation may have had over the con- 

 figuration of the body." This, he says, is a matter to 

 be inquired into, as well as " its dependency upon the 

 preceding links of the particular chain of life, variety being 

 often merely types or approximations of former parentage ; 

 thence the variation of the family as well as of the indi- 

 vidual must be embraced by our experiments." These, 

 and many other passages, show how fully and clearly Mr. 

 Matthew apprehended the theory of natural selection, as 

 well as the existence of more obscure laws of evolution, 

 many years in advance of Mr. Darwin and myself, and in 

 giving almost the whole of what Mr. Matthew has written 

 on the subject Mr. Butler will have helped to call atten- 



