Mr. J. W. L. Glaishcr on the Form of the Cells of Bees. 121 



questions, that the success of Reaumur's problem no more proved 

 the economy theory than did the discovery of conical refraction 

 prove Fresnel's wave theory. No one doubts that the bee-cell 

 is the best that could be contrived for the purposes to which the 

 bees apply it ; but the question is, what is the special reason for 

 the three rhombs and their particular form ? Lhuillier's mini- 

 mum minimorum is of little use, as he himself points out; for no 

 doubt the shape of the insect &c. require a cell of some depth 

 (and perhaps an apex); but his conclusion that economy is not 

 the primary reason is, I think, in accord with the evidence. 



In an interesting memoir in the Cambridge Transactions*, 

 Whewell has drawn special attention to the manner in which 

 hypotheses may become gradually transformed as new facts are 

 discovered, so as sometimes to become almost the opposite 

 of what they were originally, without their adherents acknow- 

 ledging any defeat. Thus the Cartesians, little by little, modi- 

 fied their vortices by rejecting or altering portions now and then 

 as they were shown to be in opposition to the facts, introducing 

 fresh suppositions, &c, until at length a vortex merely became 

 a complicated piece of machinery for producing a central force, 

 and the Cartesians and Newtonians then ceased to differ, as 

 the vortex, being no longer essential, could be ignored at plea- 

 sure — and this without the former ever yielding or formally 

 confessing defeat. Now the problem of the bee-cell seems 

 very like an hypothesis undergoing transformation, lleaumur 

 (though he only speaks of it as the reason, or one of the reasons) 

 and Maclaurin evidently thought saving of wax paramount; 

 Boscovich gave prominence to other reasons also ; and Lhuillier 

 believed economy played only a very subordinate part. Lord 

 Brougham vehemently supports the economy hypothesis, but says 

 it is only one reason among several ; and he ridicules Lhuillier 

 for thinking that lleaumur &c. asserted it to be the only reason. 

 This is the first step in the transformation ; and it is quite pos- 

 sible the economy-theorists may in the future, while still con- 

 tending for their hypothesis, gradually admit that more and 

 more weight is due to the other reasons, till at length they may 

 be contented with an acknowledgment that economy was not 

 ignored — when the transformation will be effected. 



I think the bee-cell problem is of sufficient importance, as one 

 of the most remarkable instances of instinct, to merit the space 

 that has been devoted to it. It seems curious that so obvious 

 and easily exposed a story should have been so tenacious of life ; 

 but the explanation no doubt is to be sought in the fact that it 

 lies on the borders of two sciences. In a mathematical point of 



* "On the Transformation of Hypotheses in the History of Science," 

 vol. ix. part ii. 



Phil. Mag. S. 4. Vol. 46. No. 304, Aug. 1873, K 



