26 
NATURE 
[May 11, 1871 
i 
We may be led from the consideration of the broad facts 
nature to conceptions of the most abstract kind, without being 
conscious of the slightest gap between the facts of Science and 
the creations of the Imagination. In these days the utmost skill 
is often displayed in hiding and ignoring or denying the hiatus 
by which the arguments deduced from the results of observation 
and experiment are separated from those which are based upon 
the fictions of the fancy. But, unhappily, the gulf cannot be 
filled up, or bridged over. Itmay be obscured by mists and 
clouds, but, though it be lost fora time, it is sure to be redis- 
covered and its limits studied by the curious and unphilosophical. 
Nowadays analogical argument is employed very freely without 
any attempt to show, in the first place, that there is any real 
analogy between the facts upon which the reasoning is based. In 
order to convince people that a hypothetical gemmule may move 
long distances through all sorts of tissues, it is only necessary to 
show that actual matter, millions of times as large, does burrow 
a short distance through certain textures. Mr. Darwin remarks 
that it cannot be objected ‘‘that the gemmules could not pass 
through tissues or cell-walls, for the contents of each pollen 
grain have to pass through the coats both of the pollen tube and 
embryonic sack.” - 
He might have advanced in his support the fact of fungi 
traversing tissues, of entozoa of various kinds burrowing long 
distances through the textures of the living body, and many well- 
known instances of a similar kind. But such facts do not 
strengthen the hypothesis of Pangenesis in the slightest degree. 
They were known before it was advanced, and the objection con- 
troverted has not been raised in the form indicated. We 4now that 
a thing infinitely larger than the hypothetical gemmule does pass 
through tissues, but do the gemmules really exist, and do they pass 
through ? Certainly, if they exist, they ay pass, but, as I have in- 
dicated, there are other matters invalidating the hypothesis 
besides the question of the gemmules traversing the tissues. 
Pangenetic gemmules might pass everywhere. They might leave 
the body, collect in the atmosphere and coalesce, and the com- 
pound particle formed might easily wriggle itself back again into 
the organism through the chinks between the cuticular cells. 
Such gemmules might move anywhere, up and down and in and 
out through any cell wall. They might pervade solids and fluids 
and gases. The pangenetic gemmule cannot be seen or tested, 
neither can its presence or absence be proved in any way. The 
phenomena adduced by Mr. Darwin in support of his hypothesis 
can be demonstrated ; but the pangenetic gemmules are of the 
imagination alone, and the analogy between the actual facts and 
the supposed facts is surely but an analogy of theimagination. The 
facts alluded to no more support the pangenetic hypothesis than 
does the demonstration of living germs in the air support the 
hypothesis of life in the blue sky. It is possible to supply many 
arguments stronger than those adduced in support of the 
hypothesis, nay, perhaps, stronger than any Mr. Darwin himself 
has yet advanced in favour of Pangenesis; but yet other considera- 
tions appear to me greatly to preponderate against the acceptance 
of the doctrine. Mr. Darwin admits that ‘‘from presenting so 
many vulnerable points” the life of his hypothesis “is always 
in jeopardy ;” butis it not this very jeopardy which lends interest 
and enchantment to many a hypothesis, and sustains it in the 
estimation of those who delight in conjectural information and 
scientific speculation ? LIONEL S. BEALE 
Mr. DARWIN, in his letter to NATURE of April the 27th, 
says: ‘The fundamental laws of growth, reproduction, in- 
heritance, &c., are so closely similar throughout the whole organic 
kingdom that the means by which the gemmules (assuming for 
the moment their existence) are diffused through the body, would 
probably be the same in all beings, therefore the means can 
hardly be diffusion through the blood.” Now, if in the vege- 
table kingdom pangenetic gemmules are able freely to be 
‘< diffused” from cell to cell by endosmosis, we should expect 
that in the case of grafts, where certainly such diffusion goes on 
between the cells of the stock and the scion, a bud borne 
upon the graft would certainly be affected by the gemmules 
arising in the root and stem of thestock. Yet we all know that 
the pips from a pear grafted on a quince stock will not give rise 
to a hybrid between a pear and a quince, neither will the stone 
of a peach which has been grafted on a plum stock grow into a 
tree whose stock bears plums, while the extremities of its branches 
bear peaches. A. C, RANYARD 


Noises at Sea off Greytown 
In Nature, vol. ii. p. 25, Mr. Dennehy gave an interest- 
ing account of a peculiar vibration, accompanied by sound, 
which is perceivable at night on board aé? (?) 10” steamers which 
anchor off Greytown, Central America; and in subsequent 
pages I have read with great interest various speculations as to 
its origin, which is ascribed (1, the probable solution) to troops 
of Scizenoids (with reservation) by Mr. Kingsley (p. 46) ; (2) to 
musical fish or shells, by Messrs. Evans and Lindsay (pp. 46 and 
356) ; and (3) to gas-escape from vegetable mud and sand, by Mr. 
Malet (p. 47); whilst Mr. Dennehy himself suggests the possi- 
bility of some galvanic agency. 
I remarked upon this vibratory phenomenon in a communication 
published in the Ave/d newspaper of October 26th, 1867, signed 
** Ubique,” after having heard it myself when on board the Royal 
Mail steamer Danute (Capt. Reeks) during the nights of the 
12th, 13th, 14th, and 15th of May, 1867; the new moon oc- 
curring on the 4th of the same month. As my statement serves 
to coun Mr. Dennehy’s report, I may be forgiven for giving it 
in full. 
After giving an account of the sudden appearance of a huge 
white shark in the deep sea when a man fell overboard, I pro- 
ceeded to state as follows :—‘‘On embarking on board the 
Danube steamer, lying at anchor in the roadstead off Greytown 
on the 12th May, 1867, I was informed that the ship was haunted 
by most curious noises at night since she had arrived, and that 
the superstitious black sailors were much frightened at what they 
thought must be a ghost. The captain and officers could make 
nothing of it, and it afforded a great matter for discussion, On 
inguiry I found out that other soz ships had been similarly 
affected. Curiously enough this noise was only heard at night, 
and at certain hours. Some attributed it to fish, suckers, turtle, 
&c., others to the change of tide or current; but no satisfactory 
conclusion could be arrived at. When night came on there was 
no mistake about the noise ; it was quite loud enough to awaken 
me, and could be heard distinctly all over the ship. It was not 
dissimilar to the high monotone of an A®olian harp, and the noise 
was evidently caused by the vibration of the plates of the iron 
hull, which could be sensibly perceived to vibrate. What caused 
this peculiar vibration? Not the change of current and tide, 
because, if so, it would be heard by day. Like everything else 
that we cannot explain, I suppose we must put it down to 
electricity, magnetism, &c. If this should meet the eye of any 
of the officers of the above-mentioned steamer, or others who 
have noticed this phenomenon, I should be glad to hear whether 
this effect still continues, or if any satisfactory conclusion has yet 
been arrived at. I may add that from the hold of the vessel the 
grunts of the toad-fish could be distinctly heard. I hope that 
the above notice may lead to some answers from your various 
correspondents.” 
This brief notice drew forth a rejoinder from a correspondent 
(November 23, 1867) who had noticed a somewhat similar 
sound. 
‘*The singular sound noticed by ‘ Ubique,’ I have also heard 
without knowing its origin. One moonlight night in 1854, on 
board a steamer anchored near the Tavoy river (Tenasserim) we 
were struck by an extraordinary noise which appeared to proceed 
from the shore about a quarter of a mile off, or from the water 
in that direction. It was something like the sound of a stocking 
loom, but shriller, and lasted perhaps five or six seconds, pro- 
ducing a sensible concussion on the ear like the piercing 
scream of the cicada; and this gave an impression as if 
the vessel itself were trembling, or reverberating from the 
sound. One or two Burmans on board said simply, the noise 
was produced by ‘fishes,’ but of what kind they did not describe. 
It was repeated two or three times. I never heard it before or 
after the occasion referred to, nor have | ever met with any allu- 
sion to this singular phenomenon until I perused ‘ Ubique’s’ 
communication in the /ve/d ot the 26th ult. The steamer in my 
case, I should add, was a wooden one.” 
Mr. Evans, in his letter, speaks of the rapid silting up 
of Greytown harbour this still continues, and the passage 
over the bar, which is continually shifting, is oftena matter of 
great difficulty, and indeed o'ten so dangerous that the Royal 
Mail Company will not undertake to allow their own boats to 
land, and passengers have to land in the local canoes at their own 
risk. The Nicaraguan Government, however, propose to carry 
out Mr. Shepherd’s plan of diverting the waters of the San Juan 
river from the Colorado mouth to the Greytown channel, hoping 
thereby to scour the harbour clear, 
