Characters, Hereditary and Acquired. 139 



doctrine in question. Hence, it would appear that 

 this, the only important respect wherein the doc- 

 trine of continuity as held by Galton differs from 

 the doctrine as held by Weismann, arises from the 

 necessity under which the latter finds himself of 

 postulating absolute continuity as a logical basis 

 for his deductive theory of the precise mechanism 

 of heredity on the one hand, and of his similarly 

 deductive theory of evolution on the other. So far 

 as the doctrine of continuity is itself concerned 

 (i.e. the question of the inheritance of acquired 

 characters), there is certainly no more inductive 

 reason for supposing the continuity absolute " since 

 the first origin of life," than there is for supposing 

 it to be more or less susceptible of interruption by 

 the Lamarckian factors. In other words, but for 

 the sake of constructing a speculative foundation 

 for the support of his further theories as to " the 

 architecture of germ-plasm " and the factors of 

 organic evolution, there is no reason why Weismann 

 should maintain the absolute separation of the 

 " sphere ' of germ-plasm from that of somatoplasm. 

 On the contrary, he has no reason for concluding 

 against even a considerable and a frequent amount 

 of cutting, or overlapping, on the part of these two 

 spheres. 



But although this seems to me sufficiently obvious, 

 as I have shown at greater length in the Examination 

 of IVeismannism, it must not be understood that 

 I hold that there is room for any large amount of 

 such overlapping. On the contrary, it appears to me 

 as certain as anything can well be that the amount 

 of such overlapping from one generation to another, 



