THE STANDPOINT OF BOTANY 65 



selection includes unfavorable as well as favor- 

 able characters, it seems to have lost its motive. 



And still, behind all this uncertainty as to the 

 selection and perpetuation of small variations, as 

 to whether this kind of indiscriminate selection 

 can result in anything so definite as distinct spe- 

 cies, there is clearly evident the large fact of the 

 evolution of the plant kingdom, which has be- 

 come a more difficult problem than ever before. 

 To observe and explain the small results, which 

 are the only kind that can be brought under the 

 absolute control of modern investigation, seems 

 to result in obtaining a measuring rod too short 

 to apply to general phylogeny ; and the more con- 

 fusing are our experimental results, the larger 

 becomes the error that is multiplied by the gen- 

 eral appHcation. 



So far as I am acquainted with the opinions 

 of botanists whose work has to do with structures 

 and phenomena involved in evolution, there seems 

 to be a general feeUng that Natural Selection 

 does not select individual plants on the basis of 

 some small and better adapted variation, and so 

 build up a character, which with its associates 

 will gradually result in a closely allied new spe- 

 cies; but that its selection of individuals seems 

 to hold no relation to their useful characters. On 

 the other hand, there is general conviction that 

 Natural Selection determines what species shall 

 survive, simply by ehminating those that do not. 

 Applying this to a general phylogeny. Natural 



