474 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



of capitalists, overseers, workers, etc., and while the great function 

 of distribution is carried on by wholesale and retail dealers in dif- 

 ferent commodities. Meanwhile students of biology, led by Milne- 

 Edwards's phrase, have come to recognize a parallel arrangement 

 in a living creature ; shown, primarily, in the devoting of the outer 

 parts to the general business of obtaining food and escaping from 

 enemies, while the inner parts are devoted to the utilization of 

 food and supporting themselves and the outer parts ; and shown, 

 secondarily, by the subdivision of these great functions into those 

 of various limbs and senses in the one case, and in the other case 

 into those of organs for digestion, respiration, circulation, excre- 

 tion, etc. But now let us ask what is the essential nature of this 

 division of labor. In both cases it is an exchange of services an 

 arrangement under which, while one part devotes itself to one 

 kind of action and yields benefit to all the rest, all the rest, jointly 

 and severally performing their special actions, yield benefits to it 

 in exchange. Otherwise described, it is a system of mutual de- 

 pendence : A depends for its welfare upon B, C, and D ; B upon A, 

 C, and D, and so with the rest : all depend upon each and each 

 upon all. Now let us apply this true conception of the division of 

 labor to that which Prof. Weismann calls a division of labor. 

 Where is the exchange of services between somatic cells and 

 reproductive cells ? There is none. The somatic cells render 

 great services to the reproductive cells, by furnishing them with 

 materials for growth and multiplication ; but the reproductive cells 

 render no services at all to the somatic cells. If we look for the 

 mutual dependence we look in vain. We find entire dependence 

 on the one side and none on the other. Between the parts devoted 

 to individual life and the part devoted to species-life, there is no 

 division of labor whatever. The individual works for the species ; 

 but the species works not for the individual. Whether at the 

 stage when the species is represented by reproductive cells, or at 

 the stage when it is represented by eggs, or at the stage when it 

 is represented by young, the parent does everything for it, and it 

 does nothing for the parent. The essential part of the conception 

 is gone : there is no giving and receiving, no exchange, no mutu- 

 ality. 



But now suppose we pass over this fallacious interpretation, 

 and grant Prof. Weismann his fundamental assumption and 

 his fundamental corollary. Suppose we grant that because the 

 primary division of labor is that between somatic cells and repro- 

 ductive cells, these two groups are the first to be differentiated. 

 Having granted this corollary, let us compare it with the facts. 

 As the alleged primary division of labor is universal, so the 

 alleged primary differentiation should be universal too. Let us 

 see whether it is so. Already, in the paragraph from which I 



