“¢ Mental Evolution in Animals” 61 
which is the one mainly distinguishing instinctive from so- 
called intelligent actions, and shows the manner in which 
these last pass into the first, that is to say, by way of 
memory and habitual repetition ; finally it points the fact 
that the new generation is not to be looked upon as a new 
thing, but (as Dr. Erasmus Darwin long since said*) as 
“a branch or elongation ” of the one immediately preceding 
it. 
In Mr. Darwin’s case it is hardly possible to exaggerate 
the waste of time, money and trouble that has been caused, 
by his not having been content to appear as descending 
with modification like other people from those who went 
before him. It will take years to get the evolution theory 
out of the mess in which Mr. Darwin has left it. He was 
heir to a discredited truth ; he left behind him an accredited 
fallacy. Mr. Romanes, if he is not stopped in time, will get 
the theory connecting heredity and memory into just such 
another muddle as Mr. Darwin has got evolution, for 
surely the writer who can talk about “ heredity being able 
to work up the faculty of homing into the instinct of migra- 
tion,” f or of “‘ the principle of (natural) selection combining 
with that of lapsing intelligence to the formation of a 
joint result,’’t is little likely to depart from the usual 
methods of scientific prodecure with advantage either to 
himself or any one else. Fortunately Mr. Romanes is not 
Mr. Darwin, and though he has certainly got Mr. Darwin’s 
mantle, and got it very much too, it will not on Mr. 
Romanes’ shoulders hide a good deal that people were not 
going to observe too closely while Mr. Darwin wore it. 
I ought to say that the late Mr. Darwin appears himself 
eventually to have admitted the soundness of the theory 
connecting heredity and memory. Mr. Romanes quotes a 
* “ Zoonomia,” vol. i. p. 484. 
¢ “Mental Evolution in Animals,” p. 297. Kegan Paul & Co., 
1883. 
t Ibid., p. 201, Kegan Paul & Co., 1883. 
