i^o THE KINGDOM OF MAN 



operation of the first law ? Clearly there is no reason 

 (so far as Lamarck's statement goes) for any such 

 supposition, and the two so-called laws of Lamarck are 

 at variance with one another.' 



In its most condensed form my argument has been 

 stated thus by Professor Poulton : Lamarck's ' first law 

 assumes that a past history of indefinite duration is 

 powerless to create a bias by which the present can be 

 controlled ; while the second assumes that the brief 

 history of the present can readily raise a bias to control 

 the future.' 1 



An important light is thrown on some facts which 

 seem at first sight to favour the Lamarckian hypothesis 

 by the consideration that, though an ' acquired ' 

 character is not transmitted to offspring as the conse- 

 quence of the action of external agencies determining the 

 * acquirement,' yet the tendency to react exhibited by 

 the parent is transmitted, and if the tendency is excep- 

 tionally great a false suggestion of a Lamarckian 

 inheritance can readily result. This inheritance of 

 ' variation in tendencies to react ' has a wide application, 

 and has led me to coin the word ' educability ' as 

 mentioned in the section of this address on Psychology. 



The principle of physiological selection advocated by 

 Dr. Romanes does not seem to have caused much 

 discussion, and has been unduly neglected by subse- 

 quent writers. It was ingenious, and was based on 

 some interesting observations, but has failed to gain 

 support. 



The observations of de Vries showing that in 



cultivated varieties of plants a new form will sometimes 



assert itself suddenly and attain a certain period of 



dominance, though not having been gradually brought 



1 Nature, vol. li., 1894, p. 127. 



