XI, C, 4 
Copeland: Natural Selection 
149 
but which he construes as opposed to this principle. 1 This 
evidence has been published from time to time, always with the 
implication which seems to me to be clearly a mistake, until it 
seems to be well worth while to point out that this mass of 
information has its value in the field of science that has its basic 
principle in the doctrine of natural selection, but has no value 
whatever in opposition to this doctrine. 
Doctor Willis’s early attacks on the theory of natural selection 
were devoted primarily to the support of the mutation theory 
and its application to questions of survival. In making the facts 
then at his disposal seem to invalidate the theory of natural 
selection, he made demands upon the theory that seem to me 
quite unfair, and then proposed that the theory be discarded, 
because its supporters could not meet these demands. For 
example, in the Annals of the Paradeniya Royal Botanic Gardens, 
volume IV, page 3, we find (italics mine) : 
Now, upon the theory of natural selection of infinitesimal variations, 
it is evident that any structure whatsoever must be capable of being shown 
to be or to have been — 
(1) Of some actual use now; or 
(2) Of some use in the past, in its present or in a different, and 
perhaps larger (less aborted) form; oi- 
ls) Correlated with some useful structure, whether visible or not. 
I will agree that, upon the theory of natural selection, any 
structure must be of use, have been of use, or be present as a 
result of correlation. Perhaps, if it be of use, it is capable of 
being shown to be of use. But by whom? To demand that any 
particular person or any one generation explain the uses of 
all structures is to demand omniscience. It is no more the 
fault of the theory than it is of the structure, if its interpretation 
escape us. I believe that the use of the great majority of 
1 1. Some evidence against the theory of the origin of species by natural 
selection, etc. Ann. Roy. Bot. Gardens Peradeniya 4 (1907) 1—15. 
2. Further evidence against the origin of species by infinitesimal varia- 
tions. Ibid. 17-19. 
3. The geographical distribution of the Dilleniaceae, etc., Ibid. 69-77. 
4. The floras of hill tops in Ceylon. Ibid. 4 (1908) 131-138. 
5. On the lack of adaptation in the Tristichaceae and Podostemaceae. 
Proc. Roy. Soc. London B. 87 (1914) 532. 
6. The origin of the Tristichaceae and Podostemaceae. Ann. Bot. 29 
(1915) 299. 
7. The endemic flora of Ceylon, with reference to geographical distri- 
bution and evolution in general. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London 
B. 206 (1915) 307-342. 
8. The evolution of species in Ceylon, with reference to the dying out 
of species. Ann. Bot. 30 (1916) 1-23. 
