" CONTRE-EVOLUTION " 189 



cheap philosophy of " lempus eda% rerum." There is also this 

 to be said : Dr. Larger has insisted on the normality of Parasites, 

 in view chiefly of their apparent fecundity. Now, as is well 

 known, the chief pre-requisite of Parasitism is an abundant 

 nutrition. How comes it that animals in Domestication, with 

 sluggishness of life and over-feeding as the norm, lose their 

 reproductive qualities, whilst Parasites, still more sluggish, and 

 still more indulgent in a " royal diet," i.e., under much the same 

 physiological conditions, yet fail to lose their reproductive 

 capacities ? The answer is that the physiological contradiction 

 is not real but only apparent, that Parasites are in effect losing 

 this capacity, and that it is only the blindness of Biologists which 

 does not see that there is really failure of genuine fecundity. 

 The compatibilities are merely different. The Parasite loses one 

 part after another in compensation for indulgence, whilst the 

 higher organism, liable to different compensations, can far less 

 afford to do so and may have to pay the penalty for indulgence 

 with his life. In either case, however, the analogous diathesis 

 tends to produce an identical result, namely, a curtailment of 

 the specific powers. If, according to Dr. Larger, Domestication 

 frequently results in "avortements spontanes," it may equally 

 be said that the Parasite's losing game of life is equal to an 

 " avortement perpetuel " of the species. Very aptly the author 

 himself says on p. 109 : 



L'individu primitivement normal, mais ensuite diminue dans sa vitality 

 par les causes ci-dessus enoncees, engendre des etres dont la vitality est 

 elle-meme affaiblie et cela, de plus en plus, car V observation demontre qu'un 

 degenere produit generalement de plus digineves que lui. De telle sorte que 

 la Digenirescence devient progressive par Vheridite. 



Let us say that the individual suffers a diminution in its 

 vitality chiefly as a result of " suralimentation," and that, only 

 too commonly, heredity is the worse for it. Whether, in the 

 author's words, "la gravite des tares degeneratives devient 

 incompatible avec la vie," depends, as I have said, on the 

 status and character of the particular species. In a micro- 

 organism, the same diathesis as that in a higher organism is only 

 too likely to produce different phenomena, though in either case 

 the nett effect is that of a loss of vitality. 



A dim recognition of what I have called " spiritual law in the 

 natural world " may be said to occur on p. 119, where the author 



