2J2 DARWINISM TO-DAY. 



these and other similarly not wholly convincing reasons are 

 the sort of not very admirable scientific evidence that the 

 believers in Lamarckism have to stand on. Two groups of 

 scientific men are especially well represented among the 

 Lamarckians : namely, palaeontologists and pathologists. 

 (Not all palaeontologists and pathologists believe in the 

 inheritance of acquired characters.) Both of these groups 

 are familiar with facts that are unfamiliar to biologists gen- 

 erally. And to my mind it is important that biologists should 

 recognise the fact that familiarity with the facts of histor- 

 ical geology on the one hand and with teratogenesis and 

 human disease on the other, seems to lead to a belief in 

 Lamarckism.* It should lead the general biologist to be 

 less positive in his sureness of the invalidity of Lamarckism. 

 But even were the inheritance of acquired characters now 

 an established fact, or if it should come to be one, it must 

 Lamarckism be kept in mind that Lamarckism could be sub- 



pSulluTapta- stituted onl y P artl y for Darwinism. There are 

 tions, many adaptations and much species-forming 



that Lamarckism might explain, but also there are hosts of 

 adaptations that Lamarckism cannot explain. Plate, 5 who 

 defends natural selection but accepts some part of Lamarck- 

 ism, has pointed this out clearly. He asks how the so-called 

 ""passive adaptations" could be explained by Lamarckism. 

 "The salivary glands of a non-poisonous snake could pro- 

 duce ever so much saliva, but it would not become poison- 

 ous by this, just as little as simple teeth could change by 

 use to grooved teeth and these to tubular ones. The tusks 

 of Babirussa could not be led to grow through the skin of 

 the cheeks through use, for they would have to be actually 



* A scientific man representing another phase of biologic activity, 

 and a man who has enjoyed an extraordinary opportunity for the 

 observation and testing of modes of inheritance, also believes 

 strongly in Lamarckism. This is Luther Burbank, the famous Cali- 

 fornia plant-breeder. For some account 8 of the scientific aspects of 

 Burbank's work, see the appendix of this chapter. 



