78 THE SURVIVAL OF THE UNLIKE. [ll. 



the impression, it seems to me, of being labored and far- 

 fetched; and inasmuch as it is incapable of proof, and is 

 of no occasion beyond the mere point of upholding an 

 assumed hypothesis, it is scarcely worthy serious atten- 

 tion. It would be far better for the Neo- Darwinians if 

 they would flatly refuse to accept the statements con- 

 cerning the transmission of mutilations, rather than to 

 attempt any mere captious explanation of them ; for it 

 is yet very doubtful if the recorded instances of such 

 transmissions will stand careful investigation. 



But perhaps the most remarkable example of this 

 species of Neo -Darwinian logic is produced by Weisraann 

 when he is hard pressed by Hoffman, who supposed that 

 he had proved the hereditability of certain acquired 

 characters in poppies. Weismann says: "Since the 

 characters of which Hoffman speaks are hereditary, the 

 term cannot be rightly applied to them,"* thus showing 

 that his fundamental conception of an acquired (character 

 is one which cannot be transmitted! He then proceeds 

 to elaborate this definition as follows : "I have never 

 doubted about the transmission of changes which depend 

 upon an alteration in the germ -plasm of the reproductive 

 cells, for I have always asserted that these changes, and 

 these alone, must be transmitted." Then he proceeds to 

 say that it is necessary to have "two terms which dis- 

 tinguish sharply between the two chief groups of char- 

 acters — the primary characters, which first appear in the 

 body itself, and the secondary ones, which owe their 

 appearance to variations in the germ, however such 

 variations may have arisen. We have hitherto been 

 accustomed to call the former 'acquired characters,' but 



•Essays uiKjn Heredity, i. 422 (note). 



