1 882.] On Archcesthetism. 459 



To take up first the second and third of these propositions, 

 Professor Raymond does not for the moment remember that 

 movement (or use) is an attribute of all life in its simplest forms, 

 and that the sessile types of life, both vegetable and animal, must, 

 in view of the facts, be regarded as a condition of degeneration. 

 It is scarcely to be doubted that the primordial types of vegeta- 

 tion were all free swimmers, and that their habit of building cel- 

 lulose and starch, is responsible for their early-assumed stationary 

 condition. Their protoplasm is still in motion in the limited con- 

 fines of their walls of cellulose. The movements of primitive 

 plants have doubtless modified their structure to the extent of 

 their duration and scope, and probably laid slightly varied founda- 

 tions on which automatic nutrition has built widely diverse results. 

 We may attribute the origin of the forms of the vegetable king- 

 dom to three kinds of motion which have acted in conjunction 

 with the physical environment; first, their primordial free move- 

 ments ; second, the. intracellular movements of protoplasm ; third, 

 the movements of insects, which have doubtless modified the 

 structure of the floral organs. Of the forms thus produced, the 

 fit have survived and the unfit have been lost, and that is what 

 natural selection has had to do with it. 



The origin of mimetic coloration, like many other things, is yet 

 unknown. An orthodox Darwinian attributes it to " natural selec- 

 tion," which turns out. on analysis, to be " hasard." The survival 

 of useful coloration is no doubt the result of natural selection. 

 R ut this cannot be confounded with the question of origin. On 

 this point the Darwinian is on the same footng as the old time 

 Creationist. The latter says God made the variations, and the 

 Darwinian says that they came by chance. Between these posi- 

 tions science can perceive nothing to choose. 



I have attempted to explain the relation which non-adaptive 

 structures bear to the theory of use and effort, in the following 



" The complementary diminution of growth nutrition follows the 

 excess of the same in a new locality of organ, of necessity, if the 

 v yhole amount of which an animal is capable, be. as I believe [for 

 the time being], fixed. In this way are explained the cases of 

 retardation of character seen in most higher tvpes. The discovery 

 °J truly complementary parts is a matter of nice observation and 

 pigment. Perhaps the following cases may be correctly ex- 



1 Method of Creation, p. 23, 187 1. 



