52 JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY. 



world ? His question is like that of Sir A. H. Church, who, finding he 

 could make the dye, madder, just as the plant does, out of the same 

 elements — " What takes my place in the madder plant ? " The only 

 answer is " The Directivity of Life." 



But when Darwin attributes to the architect the power and skill 

 to make a noble and commodious edifice out of unhewn and unprepared 

 stones, he is assuming as possible what cannot be done. No mortar 

 is allowable, as it would have to be designed and prepared beforehand. 

 The result of an attempt to make such a building will be a rude edifice 

 in unstable equilibrium, as one so often sees in fields where stone 

 walls take the place of hedges, as around Buxton ; portions of the walls 

 are continually falling down. This was the cause of the unprecedented 

 loss of life at Avezzano.* 



Now, if casual fragments, never intended by Nature to be parts of a 

 building, are comparable to variations in living organisms, the con- 

 clusion can only be drawn that no plant or animal could ever be, 

 what one may metaphorically call, in " vital stable equilibrium," 

 and would be always as liable to perish as a house built of unprepared 

 fragments. 



Turning, then, to natural selection as applied to plants, Darwin writes 

 a section on " Individual Differences," supposed to be comparable 

 with the indefinite variations among the stones. 



Comparing this with Darwin's definition of the process of species- 

 making by means of natural selection, he gives, however, no instances 

 of any individaul variations ever being injurious, i.e. so " inadaptive " 

 as to call for " rigid destruction." Injurious variations do not occur 

 in Nature. 



We may add to the groundless assumption of " injurious varia- 

 tions " the fact that the theory ignores any natural law governing 

 the appearance of new variations possessing adaptations to the changed 

 conditions of life. 



If an architect with intelligence is required to build a house, then 

 it is the " Directivity of Life " which adapts the variations of structure 

 in the plant to its new requirements. 



A point too much ignored by Darwin is that a plant or animal 

 cannot really be compared to a house, for the whole internal anatomy of 

 the living organism is as equally adapted to the new conditions of life 

 as are the external, visible, and distinct organs, i.e. the " variations." 

 The internal structure of the roots, stems and branches, and leaves 

 undergo profound changes when a seed of a terrestrial plant is grown in 

 water or vice versa. What is it which produces the changes in the 

 internal structure ? There is only one answer, and that is " Life." 

 It is this which is endowed with the power of making the embryonic 

 cell-structures change their form both within and without the organism, 

 so as to be in adaptation to new conditions of life, and so to establish 

 a new variety or species, as the case may be. 



* The death-rate was 90 per cent, Times, January 19, 1915. "The houses 

 consisted of stones piled one on the other without binding of cement." 



