204 
G. Udny Yule. 
fession of an older faith Professor Weldon proceeds to stultify it in 
his very next paragraph. For here he once again reminds us that 
Telephone , the mongrel pea of recent origin, which does not breed 
true to seed characters, has yet manifested the peculiar power of 
stamping the recessive characters on its cross-bred offspring, though 
pure and stable varieties that have exhibited the same characters in 
a high degree for generations have not that power.” 1 quote the 
passage in full as a characteristic example of Mr. Bateson’s method. 
Mr. Bateson endeavours first, more suo, to discredit the state¬ 
ment of the law by referring to it as a “ profession of faith,” and 
then remarks that it is “ stultified” by another fact with which it 
has nothing to do. The strength of Mr. Bateson’s reasoning is 
hardly equal to that of his language. 
I have, in the preceding passages, used the term “ Law of 
Ancestral Heredity” in a sense somewhat wider than that given by 
Professor Pearson. AT’. Francis Galton, some years since, put 
forward a formula, subsequently very considerably modified by 
Professor Pearson, suggesting or implying certain fixed values for 
the constants B x B 2 B 3 , etc. (equation 4) or at least fixed relations 
between them. This law, Galton’s Law, or one of its modifications, 
has been frequently referred to by Professor Pearson as “ The Law 
of Ancestral Heredity.” I have ventured to drop that signification, 
as I do not think the facts indicate any fixity of formula even for 
intra-racial heredity, a point in which I agree with Mr. Bateson, 
though all his evidence adduced from hybridisation seems to me 
quite beside the mark. Being unable to accept Mr. Galton’s law as 
a law of heredity, a fortiori I cannot accept it as the law, and have 
therefore applied the phrase to a more general statement. Mr. 
Galton states his law in the form that “ the two parents contribute 
between them on the average one half or 05 of the total heritage 
of the offspring, the four grandparents, one quarter, or (05) 2 ; the 
eight great-grandparents, one eighth, or (0*5) 3 and so on.” “ The 
theory ” says Air. Bateson, after some other comments with which 
I do not deal only on account of their less importance, “ further 
demands—and by the analogy of what we know otherwise not only 
of animals and plants, but of physical or chemical laws, perhaps 
this is the most serious assumption of all—that the structure of the 
gametes shall admit of their being capable of transmitting any 
character varying from zero to totality with equal ease . . . The 
comment does not hold good at all. Air. Galton’s law is only stated 
as an average or statistical law, and the “one quarter” contributed 
