NATURE 
[August 12, 1886 
The violence with which false interpretations were put upon 
this Theory and a function was assigned to it which it 
could never fulfil, will some day be recognised as one of the 
least creditable episodes in the history of science. With a 
curious perversity it was the weakest elements in the Theory 
which were seized upon as the most valuable, particularly the 
part assigned to blind chance in the occurrence of variations. 
Chis was valued not for its scientific truth,—for it could pretend 
to none, —but because of its assumed bearing upon another field 
of thought and the weapon it afforded for expelling Mind from 
among the causes of Evolution. 
There haye been many symptoms that this Philosophy is 
breaking down. Mr. Herbert Spencer, although he has worked 
out the consequences of Evolution with enthusiasm, has never 
been blind to some of its defects. His mind is too closely 
analytical not to be brought into contact at many points, with 
its manifest inapplicability and its wordy hollowness. 
But in these two articles we have for the first time an avowed 
and definite declaration against some of the leading ideas on 
which the Mechanical Philosophy depends ; and yet the caution, 
and almost the timidity, with which a man so eminent ap- 
proaches the announcement of conclusions of the most self- 
evident truth—is a most curious proof of the Reign of Terror which 
had come to be established. 
I cannot in this letter indicate the breadth and sweep of the 
admissions now made by Mr. Herbert Spencer in the two articles 
referred to,—fatal to the adequacy of the Mechanical Philosophy 
as any explanation of organic evolution. ‘They cluster round, 
and follow from the central admission that ‘‘the words ‘natural 
selection’ do not express a cause in the physical sense.” Another 
great admission is that the ‘‘co-operation” which is required 
in the growth and development of useful parts, cannot be 
accidental. 
Of course, now that so eminent a man as Mr. Herbert Spencer 
has opened his eyes and his mouth to these—an1 many othe,— 
admissions, we shall have all the Dé? AZinores following suit. 
I have read with great pleasure an article in your last number 
(p. 314) on ‘Physiological Selection,” with an ‘‘ additional 
suggestion on the origin of species.” I rejoice that the author 
has at last discovered that ‘‘ natural selection has been made to 
pose as a theory of the origin of species, whereas in point of fact 
it is nothing of the kind.” This has been my contention for 
many years. ARGYLL 
Aurora 
WITH reference to the aurora of July 27, accounts of which 
appear in NATURE, vol. xxxiy. pp. 311 and 312, the following 
particulars of the accompanying magnetic disturbance recorded 
here may be of interest. The disturbance commenced about 
3 p.m. on July 27 with small fluctuations in declination and 
horizontal force, followed by larger movements which commenced 
sharply at 10.20 p.m. in all three elements, and continued to 
about 7 a.m. on July 28. The greatest movement was between 
10,20 and 11.30 p.m., amounting to 45’ in declination, ‘or1 of 
the horizontal force, and ‘005 of the vertical force. Correspond- 
ing earth-currents were recorded as usual. 
W. 1. M. CHRISTIE 
Royal Observatory, Greenwich, August 10 
Mock Suns 
KINDLY add the following, to make up for omission of my 
figure in your issue of July 29 (p. 289) :— 
The ‘‘arched eyebrows,” as I called them, can best be de- 
scribed thus— 
Resting on the top of the halo circle, where the third mock 
light stood, was a bow of peculiar curve. It was like two well- 
arched eyebrows flowing together by a curve of gentle dip at the 
point where it touched the halo. Each arch was about equal to 
one-eighth part of the halo circle in every respect except that its 
centre lay about the middle of the chord joining the upper mock 
light with the mock light on that side of the sun. The contrari- 
flexure, and the anomalous positions of the two centres of the 
two arches, strike me as very noteworthy. I cannot presume 
to guess at an explanation. 
May I add that a correspondent of the Stazdard states that he 
too saw the white ray on the /e/¢ side ; and that it stretched, to 
use his expression, ‘‘round the sky almost to the east, and at 
the end of it was another mock sun much less brilliant,” where 
it ‘‘seemed about to begin a fresh series of mock suns and 
circles.” This too seems to me too striking a feature to be lost 
to record in NATURE. 
Littlemore, August 2 
W. J. HeRscHEL 
Meteors 
On August 4, Ioh. 4om., a beautiful slow meteor was seen 
here threading its way from about 2° S. of o Ursee Majoris to 
very slightly below B Aurigz. Its light fluctuated greatly, but 
at its best it must have been brighter than Jupiter, though the 
effect was much marred by mist. The most noteworthy feature 
was its extreme slowness of movement ; a careful determination 
gave 8 seconds as the time it remained in sight. There was 
no train of any sort; the meteor rolled along with a star-like 
aspect, and its velocity near the end point became so much im- 
peded that it seemed almost stationary. I observed fifty-seven 
other meteors during the same night, but none of these could be 
associated in appearance and direction with the one specially 
described. Its radiant-point was probably in Ursa Major, close 
to B, at about 162° + 59°. 
On August 6, Ioh. 3m., a meteor equal to Jupiter was seen 
pursuing a long path just south of and nearly parallel to a and 
e Pegasi. It left a bright streak, and was a conspicuous object, 
notwithstanding the moonlight. ‘The radiant-point was at about 
32° + 17°, nearly 6° S.S.E. of a Arietis, or possibly in the 
extreme east boundaries of Aries. 
It would be important to hear of duplicate observations of 
these large meteors. In the eastern parts of England they must 
have appeared very bright, and being visible at a convenient 
hour in the evening many persons will have noticed them. 
Bristol, August 9 W. F. DENNING 
Last night at about eleven o’clock a fine meteor was visible 
here through an opening in clouds. Its path was in Aquarius, 
commenced a little to the east of n, and seemed to be in the direc- 
tion of a line joining y and 6. In three or four seconds the meteor 
passed over about 20°, and it left momentarily a trail over the 
last 10°. This was slightly curved, the convex side being to the 
east, and the colour varying from yellow for a quarter of the 
curve to red during the remainder. At first the meteor resembled 
Saturn in size and colour, then became larger, whiter, and after- 
wards pale blue, and when it finally disappeared behind the 
clouds it considerably exceeded Venus at her brightest, both in 
size and brilliance. Te. Je Ene 
Ramsey, Isle of Man, August 5 
PHYSIOLOGICAL SELECTION: AN ADDI- 
TIONAL SUGGESTION ON THE ORIGIN OF 
SPECIE SA 
II. 
N EXT, let it be observed that we cannot expect to meet 
with much direct evidence of physiological selection 
from our domesticated varieties. For, first, breeders and 
horticulturists keep their strains separate artificially, and 
preserve many kinds of variation other than those of the 
reproductive system with which alone we are concerned ; 
and, secondly, it is never the aim of these men to pre- 
serve this particular kind of variation. Therefore, all 
that we can here learn from our domesticated productions 
is the paramount importance of preventing intercrossing 
with parent forms, if a new varietal form is ever to gain 
a footing. No one of these domesticated varieties could 
have been what it now is unless such intercrossing had 
been systematically prevented by man ; and this gives 
us good reason to infer that no natural species could have 
been what it now is unless every variety in which every 
species originated had been prevented from intercrossing 
with its parent form by nature. For the cases are ex- 
tremely rare in which one species differs from another 
(living or extinct) in respect of any feature so highly utili- 
tarian in character as to justify belief that the newer 
species owed its differentiation to natural selection 
having been able to overcome the swamping effects of 
free intercrossing. 
1 Abstract of a Paper read before the Linnean Society on May 6, by 
George J. Romanes, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S. &c. Continued from p. 316. 
