56 Luck, or Cunning ? 
But throughout his work there are passages which suggest, 
though less obviously, the same inference. : 
The passages I have quoted show that Mr. Romanes is 
upholding the same opinions as Professor Hering’s and my 
own, but their effect and tendency is more plain here than 
in Mr Romanes’ own book, where they are overlaid by 
nearly 400 long pages of matter which is not always easy 
of comprehension. 
Moreover, at the same time that I claim the weight of 
Mr. Romanes’ authority, I am bound to admit that I do 
not find his support satisfactory. The late Mr. Darwin him- 
self—whose mantle seems to have fallen more especially 
and particularly on Mr. Romanes—could not contradict 
himself more hopelessly than Mr. Romanes often does. 
Indeed in one of the very passages I have quoted in order to 
show that Mr. Romanes accepts the phenomena of heredity 
as phenomena of memory, he speaks of “heredity as 
playing an important part in forming memory of ancestral 
experiences ;’’ so that, whereas I want him to say that 
the phenomena of heredity are due to memory, he will 
have it that the memory is due to the heredity, which 
seems to me absurd. 
Over and over again Mr. Romanes insists that it is 
heredity which does this or that.. Thus it is “ heredity with 
natural selection which adapt the anatomical plan of the 
ganglia.”* It is heredity which impresses nervous changes 
on the individual.t ‘In the lifetime of species actions 
originallyintelligentmay byfrequent repetition and heredity,” 
&c.;{ but he nowhere tells us what heredity is any more 
than Messrs. Herbert Spencer, Darwin, and Lewes have 
done. This, however, is exactly what Professor Hering, 
whom I have unwittingly followed, does. He resolves all 
phenomena of heredity, whether in respect of body or mind, 
into phenomena of memory. He says in effect, ‘‘ A man 
* “ Mental Evolution in Animals,” p. 33. Nov., 1883. 
f Ibid., p. 116. $ Ibid., p. 178. 
