626 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. I. No. 23. 



The theory of life may indeed be regarded 

 as having its foundations in cellular, inter- 

 and intra-cellular mechanics and djmamics 

 as conditioned by ontogentic metabolism. 

 The fact that centrosome, nucleus and cj^- 

 toplasm are represented almost coexten- 

 sively with the presence of life itself is 

 proof that the fundamental machinery of 

 organization must be the same in the prin- 

 ciples of its action, no matter how widelj^ 

 its forms may differ from one another. 



The theory that the surface layer of 

 molecules of organisms, whether interior or 

 exterior, are in equilibrium also carries with 

 it the idea that the configuration of all 

 organs and organisms are merelj^ the ma- 

 terial expression of gi-adually built up equi- 

 potential surfaces. This gives us a far 

 more rational foundation for a theory of 

 general morphology than the hypothesis of 

 gemmaria proposed by Haacke. During 

 growth and metamorphosis these equipo- 

 tential surfaces undergo formal changes in 

 size and shape, due to the internal processes 

 of molecular transformation or metabolism. 

 But such changes are continuous, and one 

 stage or form passes into the next palpable 

 one through an infinite ntimber of slightly 

 different forms. Examples of such surfaces 

 may be seen in any organism, vegetable or 

 animal, and at any stage of the same. The 

 principle is thereforeofuniversalapplication. 



Summary. — Preformation of any organ- 

 ism in the germ has no foundation in fact. 



All that it is possible to account for upon 

 the basis of a theory of preformation may 

 be much more logically and scientifically 

 accounted for upon the ground of dj^namical 

 theory. Such a theory must deny the ex- 

 istence of separate corpuscles or gemmules 

 of any sort in the germ, whose business it 

 is to control development. All that is re- 

 quired is the assumption of a determinate 

 ultra-microscopic molecular mechanism, the 

 initial structure of which determines all of 

 its subsequent transformations. The pres- 



ent theorj' also denies that there is or can 

 be anything passive in the germ that enters 

 into its composition. 



A dynamical hj^jothesis of inheritance is 

 correlated with all the facts of physiology. 

 It is in harmony with the dynamical theorj' 

 of sex, that sees only in sexualitj' the means 

 developed by another djTiamical process 

 (natural selection) that increases the powers 

 of a compound germ to survive and varj'. 

 It is consistent with the facts of morpho- 

 logical super-position, with the dj^namical 

 theory of the limit of growth, and duration 

 of life of organic species. It is also consis- 

 tent with the view that the initial or poten- 

 tial states of the germs of species are those 

 that must result whenever they are relieved 

 from physiological service to the parent or- 

 ganism. The apparent continuity of germ- 

 plasm is, in many cases, only an effect of 

 the equilibration of the forces of the organ- 

 ism, and has no further significance. It 

 must also deny any assumed isotropy of the 

 germ as inconsistent with fact. It assumes 

 that the seolotropy of the molecular struc- 

 ture of the germ is followed by a gradually 

 increasing simplification of molecular struc- 

 ture of organs as these are built up. Metab- 

 olism is assumed to be the sole agent in 

 efiecting the mechanical and dynamical re- 

 arrangement or sorting of the molecules 

 into organs during development. Speciallj' 

 endowed corpuscles or ' biophors ' are not 

 only needless as conditioning form or func- 

 tion,but also outof thequestion, dj'uamically 

 considered. No creature can be supposed 

 to have its life or germinal properties asso- 

 ciated onlj=' with certain corpuscles within 

 it, since we cannot suppose an organized 

 whole dominated by a portion of it ; it is 

 not possible, for example, to conceive of in- 

 dividual life except from the entire organ- 

 ism that manifests it. There can be no 

 ' biophors ' — -bearers of life ; the whole or- 

 ganism must do that as an indivisible unit. 

 Corpuscular doctrines of inheritance are 



