244 ORIGIN OF INSTINCTS. 



tatingly asserts that ''Si de son cote rhymenoptere 

 excelle dans son art, c'est qu'il est fait pour I'exercer ; 

 c'est qu'il est done, non senlement d'outils, mais encore 

 de la maniere de s'en servir. Et ce don est originel, 

 parfait des le debut ; le passe n'y a rien ajoute, I'avenir 

 n'y ajoutera rien." * But how was it acquired ? M. 

 Fabre cuts the Gordian knot. *' Et tout naivement je 

 me dis : Puisqu'il faut des Araignees aux Pompiles, de 

 tout temps ceux-ci ont possede leur patiente astuce et 

 les autres leur sotte audace. C'est pueril, si Ton veut, 

 peu conforme aux visees transcendantes des theories a 

 la mode ; il n'y a la ni objectif ni subjectif, ni adapta- 

 tion ni differentiation, ni attavisme ni transformisme ; 

 soit, mais du moins je comprends." 



"Je comprends!" M. Fabre says he understands, 

 and no doubt he thinks so ; but I confess that his 

 explanation seems to me lo leave us just where we 

 were. To my mind, I confess, it seems to me to throw 

 no light whatever on the matter. M. Fabre asserts 

 that the habits of these insects have been *''de tout 

 temps" exactly what they are now. I pass by the fact 

 that the Hymenoptera are, geologically speaking, of 

 comparatively recent appearance. But is it the case 

 that habits are so invariable ? Quite the reverse. The 

 cases of variation are innumerable. 



Eomanesf refers to a criticism of the same nature 

 by Eirby and Spence. "Why," they ask, "if instincts 

 are open to modification by experience and inteUigeuce, 

 are not bees sometimes found to use mud or mortar 

 instead of wax or propolis ? Show us," they say, " but 

 one instance of their having substituted mud for 



* J. H. Fabre, " Nouveaux Souvenirs Entomologiqiics." 

 t " jNrent:il Evolution in Animals." 



