STATEMENT OF THE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 105 



place for luck ; we do not mean that conscious atten- 

 tion and forethought shall have been bestowed upon 

 the minutest details of action, and nothing been left 

 to work itself out departmentally according to pre- 

 cedent, or as it otherwise best may according to the 

 chapter of accidents. 



So, again, when Mr. Darwin and his followers deny 

 design and effort to have been the main purveyors of 

 the variations whose accumulation results in specific 

 difference, they do not entirely exclude the action of 

 use and disuse — and this at once opens the door for 

 cunning ; nevertheless, according to Erasmus Darwin 

 and Lamarck, the human eye and the long neck of 

 the giraffe are alike due to the accumulation of varia- 

 tions that are mainly functional, and hence practical ; 

 according to Charles Darwin they are alike due to the 

 accumulation of variations that are mainly accidental, 

 fortuitous, spontaneous, that is to say, that cannot be 

 reduced to any known general principle. According 

 to Charles Darwin " the preservation of favoured," or 

 lucky, " races " is by far the most important means of 

 modification ; according to Erasmus Darwin efibrt " non 

 sibi res sed se rehus subjungere " is unquestionably the 

 most potent means; roughly, therefore, there is no 

 better or fairer way of putting the matter, than to say 

 that Charles Darwin is the apostle of luck, and his 

 grandfather, and Lamarck, of cunning. 



It should be observed also that the distinction 

 between the organism and its surroundings — on which 

 both systems are founded — is one that cannot be so 

 universally drawn as we find it convenient to allege. 



