152 An Examination of Weismannism. 



inconsistent utterances — necessary, that is, for the 

 purpose of examining the theory of germ-plasm as 

 even so much as a logically coherent system of ideas 1 . 

 For we have seen that if any doubt were to be 

 entertained touching the absolute stability of germ- 

 plasm " since the first origin of sexual propagation," 

 a corresponding measure of doubt would be cast on 

 Weismann's theory of congenital variation as solely 

 due to amphimixis, with the result that his whole 

 theory of evolution would be similarly rendered 

 dubious. Since then, however, he has gone very 

 much further in this direction. First, in reply to 

 Professor Vines he says (1890) : — 



I am at present inclined to believe that Professor Vines is 

 correct in questioning whether sexual reproduction is the only 

 factor which maintains Metazoa and Metaphyta in a state of 

 variability. I could have pointed out in the English edition 

 of my "Essays" that my views on this point had altered since 

 their publication ; my friend Professor de Bary, too early lost to 

 science, had already called my attention to those parthenogenetic 

 Fungi which Professor Vines justly cites against my views ; but 

 I desired, on grounds already mentioned, to undertake no altera- 

 tion in the essays 2 . 



Next, in his essay on Amphimixis (1892), there are 

 several passages to somewhat the same effect ; while, 

 lastly, in his Germ-plasm (1893), the fundamental 

 postulate in question is, as I have said, expressly 

 surrendered. For example, we have in the following 

 words the final conclusions of his recent arguments. 

 Speaking of amphimixis, he says : — 



// is not the primary cause of hereditary variation. By its 

 means those specific variations which already exist in a species 



1 See above, pp. 63-67. 2 Xature, vol. xli. p. 322. 



