‘again, however, the point is immaterial. 
APRIL 4, 1912] 
NATURE 
. 
and inheritable, and the latter as abnormal, and 
therefore acquired and non-inheritable. If almost all 
men laboured as blacksmiths the positions would be 
reversed; that which to-day is normal and inborn 
would become abnormal and acquired. I regret, how- 
ever, I am still unable to follow the line of thought 
which connects normality with innateness and inherit- 
ability, and abnormality with acquiredness and non- 
inheritability. In what respects is the normal char- 
acter more innate and inheritable than the abnormal 
trait? If Lamarck’s words, or the words of those 
who controverted him, had any meaning, what was 
that meaning? 
Sir Ray Lankester objects also to my use of the 
word ‘stimulus.’ It seems, for example, that I 
express myself wrongly when I say that a muscle 
grows under the stimulus of use. I fear, if he is 
right, I do not know the meaning of the word. Here 
His own 
word ‘influence’ will serve. The substitution does 
not affect the argument. 
Darwin’s theory of evolution through the natural 
selection of favourable variations—or at any rate what 
is known as the neo-Darwinian theory—is intelligible. 
It separates likenesses and differences between indi- 
duals (e.g. parent and offspring) into those which 
are inborn and inheritable and those which are 
acquired and non-inheritable. An inborn likeness or 
difference is one which depends on a likeness or 
‘difference in germinal potentiality; an acquired like- 
ness or difference is one which depends on a likeness 
or difference in the action of the environment. On the 
other hand, the Lamarckian hypothesis, founded as it 
is on the notion that some characters (e.g. heads) are 
inborn, and others (e.g. scars) acquired, is not intelli- 
gible. The terms used are meaningless in the con- 
nection in which they are employed. Obviously, all 
characters depend equally on an interaction between 
germinal potentiality and external stimulus. They 
are all, therefore, as inborn and acquired, as blasto- 
genic and somatogenic as they can possibly be. No 
such things are conceivable as purely blastogenic and 
somatogenic characters, or characters which are more 
blastogenic or somatogenic than others. The whole 
“‘historical discussion,”’ therefore, is of the same order 
as would be one in which physicists discussed whether 
gravitation was blue or yellow. 
The Lamarckian controversy is, in effect, ended. 
‘The great majority of biologists reject the hypothesis 
that acquirements are transmissible. The next step, 
I think, will be a rejection of the very notion that 
some characters are inborn and others acquired, and 
an acceptance of the reality that the different classes 
of characters are distinguishable from one another 
because they are responses to different kinds of 
stimuli—nutriment, use, injury, and the like. Doubt- 
less we shall then have a discussion as to what char- 
acters, in the different species, develop under this 
stimulus, and what under that, and ultimately a 
general recognition of the immensely important truth 
that the peculiar characteristic of the higher animals 
is that the individual develops after birth more under 
the influence of use than under any other stimulus— 
hence the fact that man, the highest animal of all, is, 
as Sir Ray lLankester has often insisted, pre- 
eminently the educable animal both in mind and in 
body. G. ArcupaLtt REID. 
Southsea, March 20. 
Red Water. 
A saMPLE of red water from a.crater lake in 
Uganda, which ‘looks like blood at times,” sent by 
Dr. R. van Someren presents some features of 
interest. 
NO. 2214, VOL. 89] 
The colour was separated by filtration through a 
Berkefeld filter, but not through filter paper. It dis- 
appeared on the addition of a mineral acid or caustic 
alkali, and was not extracted by ether. The red 
deposit on the Berkefeld filter consisted of dis- 
integrated organic remains. From the water itself 
mixed with nutrient agar a bacterial culture was 
obtained, which did not develop either in an artificial 
brine or in ordinary culture media. 
A litre of the red water contained 247 g. sodium 
chloride, 96°8 g. sodium carbonate, 538 g. sodium 
sulphate, 10°5 g. potassium chloride, 51 g. sodium 
bicarbonate, and 2°4 g. sodium phosphate. 
As the chemical composition of the water gives no 
clue to the colouring matter, it is probably due to an 
organism capable of growing in a practically saturated 
alkaline brine. 
We should be glad to know of the occurrence of 
similar red brines and the causes of coloration. 
Joun E. Mackenzie. 
T. M. Fintay. 
Chemistry Department, University of 
Edinburgh, March 28. 
April Meteor-showers. 
Tue following are the most important meteor- 
showers that become due between April 5 and the end 
of the month :— 
Epoch April 6, 2oh. (G.M.T.), 1st order of magni- 
tude. Principal maximum, April 7, 12h. 45m.; 
secondary maximum, April 8, 5h. 30m. 
Epoch April 9, 3h., 11th order of magnitude. Prin- 
cipal maximum, April 7, 16h. 15m.; secondary maxi- 
mum, April 8, 14h. 
Epoch April 7, 14h. 30m., roth order of magnitude. 
Principal maximum, April 8, 5h.; secondary maxi- 
mum, April 10, toh. 4om. 
Epoch April 14, 12h. 30m., approximately 16th order 
of magnitude. Principal maximum, April 14, 
4h. tom.; secondary maxima, April 13, 6h. 30m. and 
toh. 30m. 
Epoch April 13, 22h., 3rd order of magnitude. 
Principal maximum, April 15, 13h. 3om.; secondary 
maximum, April 15, 16h. 30m. 
Epoch April 16, 17h., approximately roth order of 
magnitude. Principal maximum, April 17, 4h.; 
secondary maximum, April 19, oh. 45m. 
Epoch April 21, 4h., 1st order of magnitude. Prin- 
cipal maximum, April 20, 21h. 30m.; secondary 
maxima, April 20, toh. 20m., and April 21, 11h. 30m. 
Epoch April 23, 6h., approximately roth order of 
magnitude. Principal maximum, April 24, 1oh. 55m. ; 
secondary maxima, April 23, 11h. 50m., and April 25, 
toh. 
Epoch April 26, 6h., approximately 4th order of 
magnitude. Principal maximum, April 26, 11h. 50m. ; 
secondary maxima, April 26, 7h. 4om., April 27, 
toh. 50m., and April 28, oh. 55m. 
Epoch April 29, 14h., 7th order of magnitude. 
Principal maximum, April 28, 2h. 15m.; secondary 
maximum, April 28, 8h. 35m. 
The maxima about April 20-21, though belonging 
to an epoch of the first order of magnitude, are not so 
strong as they might be, the night maxima especially 
being rather weak. The maxima have been so com- 
puted that when observations are possible shooting 
stars should be seen within a few minutes from the 
predicted times. The heaviest maxima of the month 
are the principal maxima that occur on April 17 and 
April 24 respectively. Joun R. Henry. 
Dublin. 
