Goette recalls the fact that M. Wagner tried to supple- 

 ment natural selection with his "Law of Migration," and 

 that later on, Romanes and Gulick endeavored to supply 

 the evident deficiencies in Darwin's theory, by invoking 

 other principles; and that even at that time, Askenasy, 

 Braun, and Naegeli — and more recently, the lately deceased 

 Eimer — insisted on the fact of definitely ordered variations, 

 in opposition to the theory of Selection. 



Many naturalists recognize the difficulties but do not 

 abandon the theory of Selection, thinking that some supple- 

 mentary principle would suffice to make it acceptable: 

 many others refuse to decide either for or against Darwin- 

 ism and maintain towards it an attitude of indifference. 

 The younger investigators, however, are utterly opposed to 

 it. "There can be no doubt that since its first appearance 

 the influence of Darwinism on men's minds has notably 

 diminished, although the theory has not been entirely dis- 

 carded." — But the very fact that the younger naturalists 

 are hostile to it, makes it evident that Darwinism has a 

 still darker future in store for it: that sooner or later it 

 will come to possess a merely historical interest. 



"The present position of Darwinism," says Goette, "is 

 characterized especially by the uncertainty of criticism 

 which is unable to declare definitely in favor of either side." 

 Goette finds the chief cause of this uncertainty in the fact 

 "that men of science (even Darwin himself) have widened 

 the concept of selection as a means of originating new spe- 

 cies through the interaction of individuals in the same spe- 

 cies, so as to express the mutually antagonistic relations 



42 



