1890 OBJECTIONS TO THEOEY CONSIDEEED 215 



5th. There remains Wallace's jealousy of natural 

 selection. He will not have any other ' factor,' and 

 therefore says natural selection must eat up sexual 

 selection like the lean kine have the fat kine. But 

 natural selection alone does not explain all the 

 phenomena of sexual colouring, courtship, &c., and 

 sexual selection is exactly the theory that does. 

 Wallace's jealousy, therefore, is foolish and inimical 

 to natural selection theory itself, by forcing it into 

 explanations which are plainly false. 



My own belief is, that what Lankester calls the 

 c pure Darwinians ' are doing the same thing in 

 another direction. By endeavouring, with Wallace 

 and Weismann, to make natural selection all in all as 

 the sole cause of adaptive structure, and expressly 

 discarding the Darwinian recognition of use and dis- 

 use, I think they are doing harm to natural selection 

 theory itself. Moreover, because I do not see any 

 sufficient reason as yet to budge from the real 

 Darwinian standpoint (Weismann has added nothing 

 to the facts which were known to Charles Darwin), 

 the post-Darwinians accuse me of moving away from 

 Darwinian principles. But it is they who are mov- 

 ing, and, because they see a change in our relative 

 positions, affirm that it is I. In point of fact, my 

 position has never varied in the least, and my con- 

 fession of faith would still follow, in every detail, that 

 given 011 p. 421 of i Origin,' 6th ed., which, it seems 

 to me, might also be regarded as prophetic no less 

 than retrospective. 



If I did not say all this in my paper in physio- 

 logical selection, it is only because I never conceived 



