138 



KNOWLEDGE 



rJuNE. 1903. 



Where do the mackerel go when they depart from the 

 shore? Where are their winter (juartcVs ? One of the 

 most generally acceiitod tlicories in (lie jKist. that they 

 hibernate at the liottoui of the sea m the ueighhourhood 

 of their summer haunts, was rightly condemned by some 

 naturalists. Nor was an alternative" suggestion, that they 

 reti-eated to more southerly regions where they would find 

 a favourable sea-temi)erature, and continued to live as 

 during spring and autumn, near the surface, but in the 

 ojten ocean, likely to be correct. 



The conclusions that of late Mr. Garstaug has come to 

 ])rofoundly modify the views which have hitherto prevailed 

 conceruiug the extent, of tlie niigratious of this fisb. He 

 has clearly shown that the mackerel of the American and 

 European coasts constitute two distinct varieties or races, 

 possessed of differing characteristics, and also that there 

 exist certain minor differences which ajjpear to subdivide 

 tlie mackerel frequenting the British i-oasts into two prin- 

 cipal races, an Irish race, and tlmso mluibitiug the English 

 Channel and North Sea. 



This establishment of geographical or local races settles 

 the dispute as to the length of the mackerel's migrations. 

 The mackerel, Mr. Garstang points out, cannot cross the 

 Atlantic ; the ])ronounced difference exhibited between 

 American and European fish proves that no mixtui-e now 

 takes place between the two races. Moreover, the differ- 

 ence revealed between the two principal British groups, 

 the Irish and Channel fish, indicates that the mackerel of 

 these regions do not travel far. Each race must have its 

 own winter habitat, and this at no great distance from its 

 summer haunts. In fact, the migrations, for the most 

 part, resolve themselves into migrations from deeper to 

 sliallow layers of sea in the same localities. There is one 

 exception, in the North Sea fish. The identity of the 

 mackerel of the North Sea and English Channel— areas 

 geographically contiguous — renders it certain that the 

 theory is correct that the North Sea fish migrate from the 

 English Channel in the spring, and return to it in the 

 autumn. We have seen that while mackerel are in the 

 western part of the Channel m March, few are taken in its 

 eastern portion, or in the southern part of the North Sea 

 before the end of May or in June. The important autumn 

 fishery of these places, on the other hand, seems due to 

 the movement of the fish on their journey back towards 

 and through the English Channel. It may be that the 

 early catches made off the south coast of England in 

 December, January, and February, are the last of the 

 autumn fish of the previous season moving down Channel 

 on their emigration from the North Sea. That the first 

 fish are caught to the eastward of Plymouth, subsequently 

 travelling in a westward direction, to a few miles south- 

 west of Eddystone Light, lends confirmation to this 

 idea. This fact may also be considered in this connection, 

 that hi the Channel and North Sea the autumn fish appear 

 to be slightly larger than the spring fish, and woidd seem 

 to be the same fish at a more advanced stage of growth. 



Doubtless the depth and extent to which the mackerel 

 retire from the shore rests with the severitv of the winter 

 months. A series of expeditions for the purpose of 

 investigating the seasonal changes -oi temperature and 

 other conditions of the waters at the mouth of the English 

 Channel have been lately accomplished, and the large 

 quantity of material collected on the different vovages is 

 receiving attention. If the expectations of the results of 

 these observations be realised, a scientist will be al)le, 

 having an adequately equipped vessel, to ascertain the 

 most probable whereabouts of the schools of mackerel bv 

 his examination of the condition of the water at any given 

 time. Such a result would revolutionize the state of the 

 fishery industry, as from it would naturally follow the 



introduction of methods of fishing based on accurate 

 scientific knowledge, in lieu of the unsatisfactory empirical 

 ways still loved of fishermen in the present. 



THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE IN 

 SOCIOLOGY. 



Bv J. C^>LL1EK. 



It may seem strange that two men of gentle disposition 

 and benevolent character, like Darwin and Wallace, should 

 have originated the conception of a universal, perpetual, 

 and relentless warfare as being waged among all genera, 

 all species, all varieties, and all individuals. They can 

 have had little notion of the way it would be taken up, or 

 the extravagant lengths to which it would lie carried. 

 German and French anthropologists have raised a paean to 

 war. The old wars between peoples will give place to far 

 more' destructive wars between races. The blonde, long- 

 headed race that has hitherto led the advance of mankind 

 dreads impending defeat at the hands of the dark, broad- 

 headed races that have long been hewers of wOod and 

 drawers of water. All previous battles will have been a 

 sport to the great battle of Armageddon that the new 

 century may witness. "Men will be killed by the million," 

 Herr Gumplowicz prophesies, "for one or two degrees more 

 or less in the cephalic index." The French anthropologists 

 take up the running, and play the game of Germany. 

 The progress of humanity, M. de Lapouge announces in 

 strident accents, requires the extinction, by force or famine, 

 of the backward and pacific races. In the twentieth 

 century " the last sentimentalists will look on at copious 

 exterminations of peoples." The civilizations of Europe, 

 if Dr. Gustave le Bon is right, will end, as they began, 

 with social convulsions. 



Our own savants are less sanguinary, but have equally 

 perverted the science it was their business to expound. 

 Mr. Herbert Spencer relates that in the early fifties, when 

 he and Huxley (sometimes accompanied by Buckle) walked 

 together on Sunday mornings, the rising naturalist as 

 strenuously opposed as he afterwards supported the evolu- 

 tion of species. Unlike Spencer, he " did not allow his 

 imagination to outrun the facts." He never became a 

 true Darwinian. He thoroughly grasped the doctrine of 

 development, and aided in establishing it on two distinct 

 lines But he never took kindly to the characteristic 

 Darwinian hy]3othesis— the theory of natural selection. 

 Very late in life, he did realise that other Darwinian 

 conception of the struggle for existence, and this time he 

 allowed his imagination to outrun the facts. In his last 

 years, while his pugnacity discovered everywhere in nature 

 traces of conflict, his hypochondria universalised the signs 

 of consequent suffering. Others have imagined a pitiless 

 series of pitched battles, or an incessant warfare as 

 jirevaiUng in the ancient world. 



Not only are all such views exaggerations, as Wallace 

 calls them ; they disclose a total misapprehension of the 

 facts. The words used to name these facts are in good 

 part answerable for the perversion. An eminent Bussiaii 

 sociologist, Mr. James Novikotf, has written a book,* 

 saturated with Darwinian conceptions rightly understood 

 and generously applied, and yet pervaded by the same 

 jirepossession of an omnipresent battle. W. Eoux and 

 K. MetehniUoff describe the battle for existence between 

 tlie iliifercut i>arts of the organism. La tutte, der Kampf; 

 battle, war, aud even " the struggle for existence " seetn 



* " La Lutte entre .Societ^s humalnes." Par J. Novicow. (Paris : 

 Alcan, 1896.) 



