126 SYMBIOSIS 



in Nature, the acromegalic organism is past praying for, i.e., 

 the diathesis has too far progressed for cure. In my paper 

 before the British Association, Section I., 1912, I pointed out 

 that " in-feeding " and the ensuing metabolic abnormality are 

 the causes of antithetic and teratological developments, of sexual 

 dimorphism, female preponderance in parthenogenesis, and of 

 those phenomena of increase of size during palaeontological 

 periods which Cope's law takes into account. 



Unfortunately the reviewing of my books in Nature is 

 generally done with others en bloc. Mr. A. E. Crawley. to whose 

 lot it fell to report on Evolution by Co-operation (iQth March, 

 1914) in company with five other volumes, merely contented 

 himself (in a quite sympathetic report) with the statement that 

 my book contained " interesting observations on the fallacy 

 of in-feeding, which is parallel to in-breeding." 



Now, however, according to a full-dress review in Nature, 

 igth July, 1917, by Professor A. Keith, another writer, 

 Dr. Rene Larger, has come forward with a theory of contre- 

 evolution, purporting to show that 



Gigantism and acromegaly may attack not an individual here and there 

 as among mankind, but may break out in a whole species or genus, so 

 that all the individuals become affected, at first with a moderate degree 

 of acromegaly, but finally with an unrestrained pitch of gigantism, in 

 which condition the whole race or family finally perishes. He is of opinion 

 (the reviewer continues), that this theory explains many facts, which now 

 seem obscure to those who are studying living and extinct forms of animal 

 life. He selects his examples from the great dinosaurians, the living and 

 extinct great birds, and whales, elephants and anthropoids as mammalian 

 representatives. 



Dr. Larger apparently connects the pathology in the case 

 of animals (to which it is by no means confined) with a disordered 

 state of the glands of the body, in particular the pituitary gland . 



Whilst claiming priority for the application of a comprehen- 

 sive pathological theory to the extinction of species, I welcome Dr. 

 Larger's version as a kindred theory to mine, though one that does 

 not seem to go far enough into the true causes of the disease. I 

 hope that his work will help to call attention to " Evolutional 

 Pathology," a chapter of Evolution which I have never tired 

 of stressing as of the utmost importance. I have no fault to find 

 with Dr. Larger, who seems to have developed his theory quite 

 independently of my writings. I could wish, however, that my 

 principal theses had not been slurred over in scientific reviews. 



