i88 PRESENT-DAY RATIONALISM 



modification " which may not appear till long after the offspring 

 is hatched have been directly transmitted ? Is it not obvious 

 that the only thing which the parent can communicate to the 

 egg is the tendency, coupled of course with the capacity, i.e., in 

 a potential way, of reproducing the modification in due course? 



In the water- crowfoot, to be described below, the modifica- 

 tion, which has arisen in consequence of submergence, is the 

 dissected foliage, and this "actual modification" is not in the 

 seed ; nevertheless it appears subsequently. 



If it be a viviparous being, in which the "actual modifica- 

 tions" are looked for, as transmitted by the parents to the off- 

 spring when born ; then I would say that we must still look to 

 the ovum for any potentialities in \}ciQ. fxtus?- 



To return to my correspondent, he says : "It may be 

 sufficient to observe that no ' Darwinian ' doubts that the in- 

 dividual organism can be modified directly or by the action 

 of the environment ; or that the tendency to modification 

 [variability], being part of the congenital endowment of the 

 individual, is subject to heredity ; and jnay be strengthened 

 during successive generations by selection, whether natural or 

 artificial. . . . The results of cultivation, as carrots and 

 radishes, have been reached by the aid of selection." 



With the sentence which I have italicised I would at once 

 join issue. " Artificial Selection," which really means merely 

 " isolation," by the removal of others, has nothing to do with 

 any " strengthening," as he calls it. 



It is inconceivable to me how the mere pulling up of all its 

 neighbours, so as to leave a plant alone, can be supposed to 



^ One generally expects the best and truest criticisms in Nature ; in 

 which journal the reviewer of my little book, The Story of Wild Flowers, 

 thus writes : " Most open to criticism are the explanations offered of the 

 origin of certain structural and habitual features, by the inheritance of 

 the effects of repeated stimuli ". 



If the words I have italicised mean that " the origin " of anything 

 is due to " inheritance," a moment's thought would have told the writer 

 that " the origin of structural features " must come before they can be 

 inherited. The cart has somehow got in front of the horse ! 



