134 HEREDITY AND "ARRANGEMENT" 



them impressed with the " memory " of some 

 particular organ or feature of the body, and lo ! 

 we find ourselves back again in micromerism. 

 If we are to take a non-materialistic view of 

 memory we are plunged into a metaphysical 

 discussion which cannot here be pursued. A 

 third explanation, which by the way explains 

 nothing, is that the whole matter is one of " ar- 

 rangement," to which we shall return at the close 

 of this paper. 



The mechanism of inheritance must either be 

 physical 1 or it must be non-physical; that is, 

 immaterial. This is what emerges from our 

 discussion, and so far as science goes to-day it 

 must be admitted that neither of these explana- 

 tions can be said to be accepted generally by men 

 of science or proved perhaps even capable of 

 proof by scientific methods. If we know little 

 or nothing about the mechanism of inheritance, 

 can we and do we know anything about the laws 

 under which it works, or has it any laws ? Or are 

 its operations a mere chance-medley ? It is hardly 

 necessary to ask the latter question, for chance- 

 medley could not lead to regular operations 

 operations so regular that a court of law may act 

 upon their evidence. Yes : we answer to the first 

 question very lightly but without perhaps always 

 thinking what that affirmative answer implies, a 

 point to be considered in a moment. It may at 



1 A third explanation, that the mechanism of inheritance is 

 of a chemical character, is now being put forward, and some 

 mention of this view, which is by no means one of general 

 acceptance, will be found in another article in this volume, 



