226 CROSSING AND CLOSE-INTERBREEDING. 



tent, in the offspring; because its pronounced pecu- 

 liarity, concurs solely with the corresponding character 

 in "the mongrelized and variable form," and aids its 

 development alone, and not that of the other charac- 

 ters. The consequence is, that the offspring resembles 

 more the purely bred form. It could not well do 

 otherwise. If it resembled the mongrel form, the in- 

 fluence of the strongly marked character in the "purely 

 bred form," would be left unaccounted for; whereas, 

 when the result is as is seen, in the prepotency of the 

 "purely bred form," all of the influences of the several 

 characters, in either form, are manifest. This prepo- 

 tency is explained, simply, as the resultant, of the ac- 

 cession of one very dominant force, to a like, but lesser 

 force which is one of many equal forces. 



Darwin says (p. 92, Vol. ii, Animals and Plants, &c.) ; 



"On the whole, the subject of prepotency is ex- 

 tremely intricate. * * * ft j s> therefore, not sur- 

 prising that eveiy one hitherto has been baffled in 

 drawing up general rules on the subject of prepo- 

 tency." 



If the improvements, and positive variations observa- 

 ble, had been recognized, as the mere regain of impaired 

 integrity; neither he, nor others, would have been so 

 baffled. Darwin's error has lain, in ignoring physi- 

 ology; and, in confining himself, exclusively, to ana- 

 tomical tests, — to mere diversities in structure, without 

 ascertaining whether those diversities had any effect 

 upon the general system of functions. Anatomy and 

 physiology are correlative sciences, each being the 

 complement of the other; and neither may be well 



