" CONTRE-EVOLUTION " 211 



then, a fortiori, we must expect to find a degradation in the case 

 of parasitic propensities so pronounced as those of another 

 Hymenopter : Misocampus. Here we have an almost entire, 

 i.e., racial, divorce from Symbiosis, whilst the debauched bee is 

 but partially, i.e., individually divorced. 



The example used by Darwin to introduce his great work, 

 rather serves to illustrate the way in which depredation is for 

 ever met by natural checks, the nett effect of which is to some 

 extent to protect the " fundamental capitalist," the indispensable 

 plant. For the owners of unnatural appetites never fail to turn 

 upon and to decimate each other, thus relieving the pressure on 

 the useful types. 



When all this is said, it becomes clear that there is no 

 mysterious reason for the pathology of depredation. There is 

 obviously the strongest possible sociological reason that depre- 

 dation shall be checked and penalised wherever possible. Hence 

 physiology, or, for that matter, any other " ology " or " otany," 

 has to some extent to be subordinated to the need of protec- 

 tion i.e., to social needs. It] is, therefore, unfortunate that 

 Naturalists of all descriptions persist in strenuously denying the 

 actuality of sociological factors, and that the mere mention of 

 a socio-physiological term such as " appetite " is enough to send 

 a shiver through their ranks. They believe that such terms 

 are not " sound," and, being unable to deal with the substance 

 of their science, fondly imagine that they have at least a " sound " 

 portion to work upon when they deal with the shadow. But 

 without " sociology," all Biology is but half knowledge. It is 

 devoutly to be hoped that Dr. Larger's work will provide an 

 eye-opener, and that it will facilitate the spread of those wider 

 .sociological views for which I have contended. 



