98 THE BEGINNINGS OF LIFE. 



from which they were derived, but work in antagonism 

 to produce copies of their respective parent organisms ; 

 and hence, ultimately, results an organism in which traits 

 of the one are mixed with traits of the other/ (p. 254.) 

 Unless we have recourse to considerations of this 

 kind, or to some such hypothesis as that which Mr. 

 Darwin has put forth under the name of c Pangenesisy 

 it seems absolutely impossible for us to give any ex- 

 planation of the familiar fact, that in the ordinary 

 processes of reproduction, all organisms, whether, high 

 or low in the scale of complexity animal, vegetal, or 

 protistic produce offspring which more or less directly 

 develop into organisms similar to themselves. Very 

 grave difficulties appear to stand in the way of Mr. 

 Darwin's hypothesis, which looks like a relic of the 

 old, rather than a fitting appanage of the new Evolu- 

 tion philosophy 2 . On the other hand, Mr. Spencer's 

 totally different hypothesis concerning physiological 



1 'Plants and Animals under Domestication,' vol. ii. p. 357. Mr. 

 Darwin says : ' Gemmules are supposed to be thrown off by every cell 

 or unit, not only during the adult state, but during all the stages of 

 development. Lastly, I assume that the gemmules in the dormant state 

 have a mutual affinity for each other, leading to their aggregation either 

 into buds or into the sexual elements. . . . Hence ovules and pollen- 

 grains, the fertilized seed or egg as well as buds, include and consist 

 of a multitude of germs thrown off from each separate atom of the 

 organism* So that Pangenesis ' implies that the whole organisation, in 

 the sense of every separate atom or unit, reproduces itself (pp. 374 and 

 358). 



2 See an article entitled ' Darwin's Hypotheses,' by Mr. G. H. Lewes, 

 in ' Fortnightly Review' for 1868, and Mr. St. George Mivart's ' Genesis 

 of Species ' (1871), chap. x. 



