302 



SCIENCE. 



tinct from the usual geographical divisions of the globe. 



All these facts are then shown by Mr. Wallace to be 

 a necessary result cf the " law of evolution." The na- 

 ture and amount of "variation" are exhibited by a 

 number of curious examples ; the origin, growth and 

 decay of species and genera are traced, and all the inter- 

 esting phenomena of isolated groups and discontinuous 

 generic and specific areas are shown to follow as logical 

 consequences. 



The remaining subjects discussed by Mr. Wallace 

 carry him into the realm ol fieice controversies, and 

 relate to theories involving problems awaiting further 

 investigations for their solution. One of these subjects 1 

 — The Position of the Great Oceans and Chief Land 

 Areas — is dealt decisively by Mr. Wallace, who claims ! 

 that " on the whole they have remained uncharged 

 throughout geological time." This declaration of the 

 author has been already challenged, and we shall watch 

 with interest if Mr. Wallace is capable of maintaining his 

 position on this subject. 



Perhaps the most valuable part ot this work is the 

 discussion of the question of geological time as bearing 

 on the development of the organc world, leading to an 

 investigation as to the exact nature of past changes of 

 climate. 



In answer to those who may consider the subject last 

 spoken of as unsuited to such a work as the present, the 

 author claims that, although many of the causes intro- 

 duced are far too complex in their combined action to 

 enable us to follow them out in the case of any one 

 species, yet their broad results are clearly recognizable, 

 and we are thus enabled to study more completely every 

 detail and every anomaly in the distribution of living 

 things, in the firm conviction that by doing so we shall 

 obtain a fuller and clearer insight into the causes of 

 nature, and with increased confidence that the " mighty 

 maze " of Being we see everywhere around us is " not 

 without a plan." 



No person should offer an opinion on the " theory of 

 evolution " who has not studied this work of Mr. Wal- 

 lace, for it forms an essential part of the literature ot the 

 subject. 



NOTE IN REGARD TO "PRIMITIVE DESIRES." 



In a communication published in an earlier number of 

 "ScrENCE," (No. 29, Jan. 15, 1881) Dr. Clevenger, of 

 Chicago, discusses the relalation existing between the 

 desire for food, and the desires connected with the multi- 

 plication of the species. He appears to draw the conclu- 

 sion that hunger is the primitive desire. 



There are seme observations made by alienists, which 

 strongly tend to confirm Dr. Cleverger's theory. 



It is well known that under pathological circumstances, 

 relations obliterated in higher development and absent in 

 health, return and simulate conditions found in lower and 

 even in primitive forms. 



An instance of tlvs is the pica or morbid appetite of 

 pregnant women, and hysterical girls for chalk, slate pencil 

 and other articles of an earthy nature. To some extent, 

 this has been claimed to constitute a sort of reversion to 

 the oviparous ances'ry, which like the birds of our day 

 sought the calcareous material required for the shell 

 structure in thcr focd (?) 



There are forms of mental perversion, properly classed 

 under the head of the degenerative mental states, with 

 which a close relation between the hunger appetite and 

 sexual appetite becomes manifest. 



Under the heading " Wollust.' — Mordlust-Anthro- 

 pophagie " Krafft. Ebing describes a fcrm of sexual 

 perversion, where the suffered fails to find gratification 

 unless he or she can bite, eat, murder or mutilate 

 the mate. He refers to the old Hindoo myth of Qiva 

 and Durgd as showing that such observations in the 

 sexual sphere were not unknown to the ancient races. 



He gives an instance, where after the act, the ravisher 

 butchered his victim, and would have eaten a piece of 

 the viscera, another where the criminal drank the blcod 

 and ate the heart, still another where certain parts of the 

 body were cooked and eaten.* 



In reference to this question, Dr. Clevenger some time 

 ago sent me the following interesting letter, which, antic- 

 ipating much that I shculd otherwise say, may find a 

 place here. 



Chicago, February 17, 1881. 



Dear Doctor : 



The suggestions that you mgde. in a recent nc te to me, on the ex- 

 tension cf ihe Hunger Theory to Man, are of loo much value not to 

 be published. Professor E. D. Cope kindly sent me the reprint 

 of an article of his entitled "The Origin of the Will " which ap- 

 peared in the Penn Monthly, for June, 1877, wherein the Professor 

 takes the ground that Hungcris the piimitive desire. " The move- 

 ment of the Amoeba in engulfing a Diatom in its jelly is as much 

 desigred, as the ciplomacy of the statesman or the investigations of 

 the student, and the motive may be the same in all three cases ; viz.: 

 hunger " (p. 438). " In the lowest animal the first movement was 

 doubtless a mere discharge of force ; but the first designed action, 

 the appropriation ot food, was due to a. sense of want or hunger, 

 which is a form of pain. This was followed by graiificaiion, a 

 pleasure, the memory of which constituted a motive for a more 

 evidently designed act, viz.: pursuit "(p. 446). I am rather in- 

 clined to reverse the conception of the unconscious being derived 

 from the conscious act and conclude that the pain of hunger is 

 akin to the desire barium may have forsulphuric acid or any mole- 

 cule may have for another. 



Yours truly, 



S. V. Clevenger. 



I cannot see the necessity of considering " the move- 

 ment of the Amoeba, as designed as the diplomacy of the 

 slatesman etc." It is either a truism according to one 

 reading, or utterly erroneous — according to another. If 

 " as designed " in the above means — based on the same 

 broad summation of registered impressions potent in in- 

 tellectual activity, I must say that due regards have not 

 been paid to very fundamental facts in framing the clause 

 criticized. E. C. Spitzka. 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. 



[The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 

 by his correspondents. No notice is taken 0/ anonymous communi- 

 cations^ 



To the Editor of " Science :" 



In reply to the remarks made by Mr. Morris about my 

 communication to you (No. 43), I would like to say a 

 few words. 



In the first place I beg to enter a protest against 

 the gentleman's suggestion with which he prefaces his 

 reply, to wit : 



" The main difficulty seems to be that I have gone 

 counter to certain authors whom they are disposed to 

 consider as authorities," meaning Prof. Dolbear and the 

 writer. As to this objection, so often raised at the pres- 

 ent moment, it seems to me that it is only applicable in 

 case the authority is adduced in place ot an argument, 

 or in order to fortify it. As a rule, men of an independ- 

 ent turn of mind do not believe or accept theories be- 

 cause this or that authority has advanced them, but be- 

 cause they are plausible to them — perhaps enly as long 

 as they do not hear of any other in regard to the subject. 

 But, it they should adopt another theory in place of one 

 formerly held, it is certainly not on account of the fact 

 that it has emanated from a certain authority, but be- 

 cause their mode cf thinking and working out problems 

 agrees with that which originated the theory, e. the 

 authority's. 



Since I have nowhere in my letter quoted any authority 

 specifically, gathering my arguments from the works of 

 those men whose writings are most congenial to my 

 frame cf mind, and from them weaving the net of my 

 intellectual product with an occasional glimpse from my 



* Uebei gtwisse ^nomalien des Gcschlechtb-lricbcs. Von Kraft- 

 Ebing, Aich f. Psycliiatrie VII. 



