Skip to main content

Full text of "The evolution of living organisms"

See other formats


i 


3937109 


ES 
iM 


E 


TI 


WHOIW “LS 4O ALISHSAINN 


Ay. 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2007 with funding from 
Microsoft Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/evolutionoflivindOgooduoft 


THE 
PEOPLE’S 
BOOKS. 


ft 


THE EVOLUTION OF 
LIVING ORGANISMS 


Are EVOLUTION OF 
LIVING ORGANISMS 


BY 


EDWIN S. GOODRICH, F.R.S. 


FELLOW OF MERTON COLLEGE, OXFORD 


REVISED EDITION 


Hondon and Edinburgh: 
T.C. & E.C. JACK, LTD. | T. NELSON & SONS,LTD. 


IgIg 


THE INSTITUTE CF MEDIAEVAL STULIES 
iO &! SLEY PLE &. 
TORON: +O 5, ae 


phe Qn am s 93] 
a? ko ee 
» 


AUG 21 1957 


PREFACE 


Wiruin the limits of this little volume it would be 
scarcely possible to deal with the vast subject of Organic 
Evolution from all points of view. That evolution has 
taken place is now universally admitted by students of 
Biology. I have, therefore, discussed not so much the 
evidence for the doctrine of transformation, as the 
results of modern research on the nature and relative 
importance of the factors which have contributed to the 
production of the various forms of life we see around us. 
No attempt has been made to give an historical account 
of theories of evolution, and many important point: 
have been only very briefly treated, owing to lack of 
space. As far as possible the use of technical terms has 
been avoided; but if the meaning is to be clear and 
definite, it must sometimes be expressed in technica 
language. Such terms are explained in the text, ano 
the reader will easily find the explanation on turning 
to the index at the end of the book. 


EDWIN 8S. GOODRICH. 


Merton Cotiece, Oxrorp, 
March 18, 1912. 


PREFACE TO THE SECOND 
EDITION 


Tuis second edition has been entirely revised. Although 
this little book remains substantially the same, yet I 
hope that the correction of some errors, the removal 
of some obscurities, and the insertion of some additions, 
will help to make it a more trustworthy and intelligible 
introduction to the study of a vast subject of ever-increas-_ 
ing interest. 


EDWIN 8. GOODRICH. 
October 12, 1918. 


CONTENTS 


THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIFE . . . 


THE CELLULAR STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS: RE- 
PRODUCTION AND DEATH . ° . : 
4 


DARWINISM AND HEREDITY ; se s 


VARIATION AND THE FACTORS OF INHERITANCE: 
DETERMINATION OF SEX . . . 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE AND NATURAL 
SELECTION ° ° . . : F 


ISOLATION AND SEXUAL SELECTION . . 


. PHYLOGENY AND CLASSIFICATION : . . 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD OF SUCCESS AND 
FAILURE . . . . . ‘ 


PSYCHOLOGY AND THE EVOLUTION OF INTELLI- 
GENCE . ‘ : : ° . . 


A COURSE OF READING ON EVOLUTION . . 
INDEX ° : . . . . . . 


THE EVOLUTION OF 
LIVING ORGANISMS: 


4 
CHAPTER I 


THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIFE 


THE variety of living things is so great, the manifesta- 
tions of life so diverse and wonderful, that it may seem 
at first sight impossible to explain them all as the result 
of the continuous and uniform action of certain funda- 
mental “natural causes.” Yet this is the ambition of 
the scientific student of nature. But, before attempting 
to describe the process of evolution, and estimate the im- 
portance of the several factors which have contributed to 
bring about the development of life, let us see what 
science can teach concerning the physical and chemical 
properties of living organisms. 

All living things have certain characteristics in com- 
mon as regards their structure and composition, their 
properties and activities. They all feed, grow, and re- 
produce. But if we say that in the possession of these 
characteristics living matter differs from non-living 
matter, we do not mean to imply that the difference is 
absolute, that a perfectly hard and fast line can be drawn 
between them, that the gap separating the living from 


10 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


the non-living can never have been bridged. On the 
contrary, although far from being able to give a complete 
scientific explanation of all the phenomena of life, we 
have made so much progress towards that final goal of 
the evolutionist that we seem fully justified in believing 
that the transition from the non-living to the living has 
indeed occurred, and even in hoping that some day the 
very origin of life will be explained. 

The organisms now living on this earth are known as 
plants and animals. The study of plants is called 
Botany, that of animals Zoology ; while Biology is the 
name given in England to the science of living things in 
general, including both animals and plants. Now one of 
the first results of a deeper knowledge of living organ- 
isms is to show us how much there is in common between 
them, and how much they differ from their non-living 
surroundings. There can be no doubt that even the 
simplest plant or animal now living is the product of a 
long series of evolutionary changes the initial steps of 
which have long since disappeared, or are at all events 
unknown to us. 

In the first place, all living matter contains substances 
of peculiar molecular structure and composition, far more 
complex than any compounds found in inorganic nature. 
Such complex compounds occur only in living matter 
itself, or in its products. But the difference between 
these organic and the inorganic substances is only one of 
degree, and many of the most characteristic of them have 
been artificially made in the chemical laboratory. 

Built up of the ordinary elementary chemical sub- 
stances of nature, chosen indeed as we might expect from 
among the commonest elements on the surface of the 
earth, these organic compounds may be grouped in three 
classes: carbohydrates (such as sugars, starch, and 
cellulose), fats, and proteins. Of these the proteins are 
by far the most important. For while the molecule of 
fat or carbohydrate consists entirely of various combiua- 


NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIFE. 11 


tions of the three elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, 
the protein molecule always contains in addition nitrogen 
and sulphur, and hence can attain a far higher degree 
of complexity endowing it with many new properties. 
Small quantities of other elements, such as phosphorus, 
iron, chlorine, potassium, sodium, calcium, and mag- 
nesium are also found combined with the five essential 
elements mentioned above in the protein molecule. So 
complex are the proteins that the exact chemical formula 
of even the simplest varieties has not yet been made 
out. We know, however, that the molecule is very 
large, containing some hundreds or even thousands of 
chemical atoms, with certain characteristic groupings 
of C, H, O, and N. Further, the proteins display 
several physical properties whieh play an important part 
in the processes of life. 

Correlated with this complexity of chemical composi- 
tion is the most striking and important of all the physico- 
chemical properties of living matter, namely a capacity 
for perpetual change. It involves both an exchange of 
material and a transformation of energy. This funda- 
menial process, the basis of all vital activities, is called 
metabolism. Briefly to explain the process it will be 
best perhaps to take first the case of animals. What is 
said of metabolism in animals applies in principle to 
living organisms in general. An animal is perpetually 
taking in food and oxygen, and perpetually giving off 
carbon dioxide and waste products. Hence the neces- 
sity for respiration (oxygen being derived from the air) 
and nutrition. Now the food consists chiefly of fats, 
carbohydrates, and proteins ; and since energy has been 
consumed in the building up of these compounds, it will 
again be freed if they are broken down or split up into 
simpler compounds. During their whole life animals 
perform work, and give off heat; and the energy so 
spent is derived from the food. The stored-up potential 
energy of the food is continually being converted into 


12 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


kinetic energy (various forms of motion) and heat. The 
freeing of the energy is brought about by the burning or 
oxidation of the food materials, which are thus more or 
less completely broken down from a highly complex 
state into such comparatively simple compounds as 
water, carbon dioxide, and urea. Hence the necessity 
for excretion to remove these waste oxidised substances. 
In ourselves the urea is passed out by the kidneys, and 
the carbon dioxide by the lungs. An organism may 
be compared to a heat engine, which derives its energy 
from the fuel supplied to it. Throughout the process 
neither matter nor energy is either gained or lost, but 
merely changed from one form to another. 

One of the most important and fundamental generali- 
sations of biology is that the principles of the conserva- 
tion of energy and of the conservation of matter hold 
good in living things as they do in inorganic nature. All 
the matter which enters an organism as food and oxygen 
eventually leaves it as waste product, except in so far as 
it is retained for purposes of growth. Similarly all the 
energy brought in is balanced by work done and heat 
given off. Neither new matter nor new energy is pro- 
duced, although both are undergoing unceasing change. 
This is the metabolic process in terms of physics and 
chemistry ; it is quite characteristic of living things. 
There is no life without metabolism, and no metabolism 
without life. 

In the living engine not only is the food consumed, 
but the machinery itself is involved in the process of 
change, so that the food material brought in does not 
for the most part merely pass through as fuel; it serves 
to build up that complex living substance, or machinery, 
which is perpetually breaking down again into non-living 
matter. Chemical instability, a tendency to unite with 
other substances, or to break up into simpler groups, is 
manifested by these highly complex protein molecules. 
There is thus a double process continually going on in 


NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIFE. 13 


metabolism. A building up or synthesis of substances 
to form higher and higher compounds in the making of 
which energy is absorbed—this is the anabolic process; 
and a corresponding breaking down of these highest 
compounds into simpler ones, and eventually into waste 
products, during which energy is freed—called the kata- 
bolic process. In living substance there are, then, two 
series of compounds: one leading up to the highest com- 
plexity, and the other leading down to waste products 
from which energy is no longer drawn. This mixture of 
a double stream of substances undergoing these physico- 
chemical changes is the living matter itself, the very 
physical basis of life, known as protoplasm. 

In physical structure protoplasm is a viscid or semi- 
liquid colourless substance seen under the highest 
powers of the microscope it appears to be composed of 
the minutest globules of a more liquid substance enclosed 
in a meshwork of denser fluid. When dead protoplasm 
is analysed it is found to be composed of a variety of 
anabolic and katabolic proteins, associated with water 
and certain mineral salts. Protoplasm is the essential 
living substance present in all living organisms, the 
seat of all their activities. There is no protoplasm apart 
from life, and no life without protoplasm. 

Animals have lost the power of building up new proto- 
plasm from inorganic matter, indeed from any compounds 
lower than the simplest nitrogen-containing proteins or 
their immediate derivatives (albumoses, peptones, amino- 
acids). They inevitably starve sooner or later on a diet 
without protein, however much fat or carbohydrate it 
may contain, since they are unable to replace the highest 
nitrogen compounds which necessarily break down in 
the metabolism of protoplasm. Speaking generally, 
animals can build up the most elaborate proteins from 
the simplest, and fats from proteins or simpler carbo- 
hydrates ; but the carbohydrates themselves they are in- 
capable of forming from inorganic matter. Thus although 


14 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


they run the risk of starvation if no proteins are avail- 
able, yet by feeding on other organisms they make 
use of the best fuel, with the greatest amount of poten- 
tial energy, and may have large quantities of surplus 
energy to dispose of—for the amount of energy freed 
by the breaking down of the food material much exceeds 
that consumed in the anabolic processes in the ordinary 
course of life. 

All animals depend ultimately on plants for their food. 
Carnivorous live on herbivorous animals, and these in 
turn on plants, whose powers of synthesis are more 
complete. 

Even the ordinary green plants can only build up pro- 
toplasm from inorganic material in the presence of sun- 
light. This they accomplish with the help of the green 
substance, chlorophyll, which decomposes the carbon 
dioxide of the atmosphere, freeing the oxygen, and com- 
bining the carbon with water to form starch, C,;H,)0,, 
thus storing up energy from the sun. With the help 
of inorganic nitrogen compounds derived from the soil, 
protein can then be formed. 

Many lower plants have the power of building up pro- 
toplasm without chlorophyll and sunlight. Fungi can 
synthesise protein from carbohydrates and inorganic 
salts of nitrogen, but depend on organic compounds 
for their supply of carbon. Among the multitude of 
bacteria which abound in the soil there are many which 
can build up proteins, and therefore protoplasm, from 
inorganic compounds alone ; and some indeed which can 
make use for this purpose of the free nitrogen of the 
air. 

All the phenomena of life are associated with the 
physico-chemical processes of metabolism taking place 
in protoplasm alone. The three most characteristic 
properties of living matter: irritability, or the power 
to respond to stimuli, growth, and reproduction, all 
depend on metabolism. An excess of anabolic over 


NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIFE. 15 


katabolic processes leads to increase of protoplasm, to 
growth, and ultimately to reproduction. An excess of 
katabolic over anabolic processes leads, on the contrary, 
to reduction and to death. 

Like all physico-chemical processes, metabolism is 
limited by definite conditions. The essential elements 
must be present, and a sufficiency of food to balance 
the waste. Water is another essential, since all the 
chemical reactions really take place in solutions. Free 
oxygen is also necessary for the burning of the food 
material, except in the rare case of certain parasitic 
organisms and bacteria, which can obtain it from com- 
pound substances. Moreover, metabolism can only take 
place at all within a somewhat narrow range of tem- 
perature, the exact limits of which vary with different 
organisms. No metabolism is, of course, possible at 
a temperature so high as to coagulate or destroy the 
proteins, or so low as to stop chemical action. 

Most, perhaps all, of the processes of metabolism take 
place with the help of special proteins, known as ferments 
or enzymes, which have the property of facilitating and 
hastening chemical actions. Just as a small trace of 
platinum black will cause an indefinitely large amount of 
hydrogen peroxide (H,O,) to decompose into oxygen and 
water, so a small quantity of ferment will cause an inde- 
finitely large amount of carbohydrate, fat, or protein to 
break up into simpler substances. Such ferments, which 
are not themselves affected, which are not involved in the 
end products of the actions they facilitate, are called 
catalytic, and play a most important part in the mechan- 
ism of life. 

In the foregoing pages we have seen that living organ- 
isms contain no special vital elements differing from those 
of non-living matter, and are actuated by no special vital 
force. From the physico-chemical point of view life is 
@ process involving perpetual change in a complex of 
elaborate compounds continually being built up and con- 


——— 


16 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


tinually being broken down. A stream of non-living 
matter with stored-up energy is built up into living 
matter, and again passes out as dead matter, having 
yielded up the energy necessary for the performance of 
the various activities of the protoplasm. All the pheno- 
mena of metabolism on which these activities are based 
are strictly limited by external conditions and the pro- 
perties of the material taking part in it. 

We cannot, therefore, speak of a special living chemical 
substance. The full attributes of life are only possessed 
by a mixture of substances, some very complex, others 
more simple, which make up protoplasm asa whole. The 
living process forms a chain every link of which is 
essential. Nosingle link by itself can be said to be living, 
nor can we really draw a hard and fast line marking off 
where the life process begins and where it ends. The 
protoplasm itself contains many substances, such as yolk 
of starch granules, which are merely materials for future 
use in the building up of new protoplasm, or again 
granules of waste products, or special products of decom- 
position stored for future use (digestive ferments, secre- 
tions) which may never again enter the life cycle. 

It was mentioned above that irritability, or the power 
of responding to a stimulus, is one of the most important 
characteristics possessed by all living matter. A mani- 
festation of metabolism, it depends on the fact that the 


_ material of protoplasm is in a state of unstable equili- 


brium capable of being disturbed by a stimulus. Stimuli 


‘are those things or conditions in the environment which 


can bring about disturbance or response. Naturally the 
character and amount of the stimulus has no direct re- 
lation to the character and amount of the response. Just 
as the pressure of a button may ring a bell, explode a 
mine, or start an engine, so a stimulus applied to living 
protoplasm may cause a plant to grow, an animal te 
move, or a man to embark on a course of action. The 


extent and nature of the response depend on the structure 
(2,081) 


NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIFE. 17 


of the mechanism stimulated, and on the amount of 
energy stored init. But the mechanism may be so dis- 
posed as to vary in its response according to the intensity 
and duration of the stimulus. An external stimulus fires 
off, so to speak, an internal metabolic change ; this may 
give rise to other changes, some of which may react on 
the first. So the motiun of a mechanism may regulate 
its own action ; as does, for instance, the governor of a 
steam-engine. An internal change may become an in- 
ternal stimulus starting new reactions. But there is no 
real distinction between internal and external stimuli; 
what is external to a part may be internal to the whole. 

We must think, then, of living organisms as marvel- 
lously complex mechanisms, with their parts so adjusted 
as to set going, regulate, or restrict each other’s action. 
A chain of such interactions forms the self-repairing, 
self-regulating mechanism so essential for the continu- 
ance of the process of life. 

It is by means of this fundamental attribute of irrita: 
bility that protoplasm comes into relation with its en- 
vironment. It is the secret of adaptation. Of the 
stimulating factors of the environment some, like tem- 
perature and water, are of a general nature, ever present 
and necessary ; others, like sound or light or some par- 
ticular chemical compound, are more special, and not 
always essential. 

When first we approach the problems of evolution we 
are apt to ask for definitions; to seek for distinctions 
separating the living from the dead, the organic from the 
inorganic : we try to discover hard and fast lines between 
species and varieties, between plants and animals, be- 
tween the conscious and the unconscious. But as we 
study the question deeper, and extend our field of vision, 
we come to recognise that the definitions are usually 
misleading, the distinctions artificial, the sharp lines 
arbitrary. The breaks in nature, if breaks there seem 
to be, are gaps in our knowledge, and diminish in size and 


18 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


number as science advances. If we analyse one by one 
the distinguishing features of living matter, they can all 
be paralleled in inorganic nature. No one universally 
present in the first is universally absent in the second. 
Complex chemical compounds, the properties of which 
cannot be discovered in those of their component ele- 
ments, cyclic changes of matter and energy, even self- 
regulating mechanisms, occur in the non-living world. 
As the untutored savage explains the movements of a 
watch by attributing them to a spirit which has entered 
into it, so many writers hold that the activities of living 
matter are due to some special and mysterious vital 
force. They attempt to bridge the gaps in our know- 
ledge by merely giving thema name. This is no scientific 
method ; science advances by explaining, that is de- 
scribing, the unknown in terms of the known. If vital 
force is merely a general term for those new properties 
manifested in new mechanisms of increasing complexity, 
there is no harm in it ; certainly living matter must dis- 
play properties not found in simpler substances. But it 
has no intelligible meaning if used to denote some force 
added, so to speak, from without over and above the 
ordinary properties, acting on the physico-chemical 
mechanism but not of it. Like a vortex, the metabolic 
process in living matter draws in inorganic substance 
and force at one end, and parts with it at the other ; it is 
inconceivable that these should, as it were, pass outside 
the boundaries of the physico-chemical world, out of 
range of the so-called physico-chemical laws, at one point 
to re-enter them at another. 

When we maintain that the physico-chemical processes 
of metabolism, with which are correlated all the pheno- 
mena of life, form a continuous series without break, we 
do not in the least mean to assert that this is a complete 
and satisfying explanation of life from all points of view. 
It is only one aspect of the problem, and the psychical is 
another. Doubtless there are still other aspects within 


NATURE AND ORIGIN OF LIFE. 19 


the wider scope of philosophy. But we hold that the 
various aspects cannot be described in the same terms, 
that they neither overlap nor break into each other’s 
continuity. They are one-sided abstractions based on a 
reality, with the ultimate nature of which it is not the 
function of natural science to deal. 

But, it will be asked, if life is thus correlated with a 
physico-chemical process, why cannot living substance 
be made in the laboratory? The answer is that the ex- 
pectation is premature, perhaps never to be realised. 
Since we are still ignorant of the intimate structure of 
the proteins, we can hardly be expected to manufacture 
them. Moreover, it would not be sufficient to make one 
or even several such compotnds, but the whole chain of 
growing complexity. If the machine is to work, the 
mechanism must be complete. There is, also, a long 
history behind even the simplest organism found at the 
present day ; there must be a vast difference between 
the very simplest of these and the initial stages in the 
evolution of protoplasm. It would be as absurd to ex- 
pect an experimenter to build up an organism in a labora- 
tory as, for instance, to expect a refined civilisation to 
arise In a day among the savages of Central Africa. 
Great advances have already been made in the synthesis 
of organic compounds of carbon and nitrogen; but if 
any stage in the development of living substance were 
artificially made, it would probably be so different from 
the protoplasm of modern plants and animals that we 
should scarcely recognise it as living at all, even if we 
had it before us. 

An attempt to reconstruct in imagination what we 
believe may have been the history of the origin of living 
matter may be made not altogether without profit. 

Before the principle of the continuity of life, to which 
we shall refer later, was established, it was thought that 
living things arose spontaneously from organic com- 
pounds. Moulds, the bacteria of putrefaction and fer- 


20 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


mentation, infusoria, and suchlike forms, were supposed 
to develop de novo in liquids of appropriate composition. 
But Pasteur and others in the last century definitely 
proved that such organisms really arise from germs or 
spores originally present in the liquids; that neither 
putrefaction nor fermentation will take place, nor organ- 
isms of any kind appear, in substances which have been 
thoroughly sterilised, or from which all living germs 
have been rigidly excluded. So far as we know, living 
organisms at the present day do not develop spontane- 
ously, but are all derived from pre-existing organisms. 

We must, however, suppose that at some period in the 
earth’s history, when conditions were favourable and 
perhaps very different from those of the present time, 
living protoplasm made a first appearance. Possibly 
these conditions will never be repeated, either in nature 
or in the laboratory, and the first stages in the evolution 
of life may never be discovered. The temperature, 
moisture, pressure, and other conditions must have been 
such as to allow of the formation of high compounds of 
various kinds. Many of these would be quite unstable, 
breaking down almost as soon as formed ; others would 
be stable, and merely persist and accumulate. Still 
others might, possibly with the help of some katalytic 
substance, tend to reform as fast as they broke down. 
Once started on this track such a self-repairing compound 
or mixture would inevitably tend to perpetuate itself, and 
might combine with, or “feed” on, other compounds less 
complex than itself, as was long ago suggested by 
Lankester. For any chemical action will continue so 
long as the conditions are favourable; a trail of gun- 
powder will inevitably explode from end to end provided 
it be continuous, and will go on burning so long as 
powder is supplied. 

The principle of the survival of the fittest applies with 
all its force to such initial steps in the evolution of life. 
The more completely self-regulating mixtures would out- 


STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS. 21 


last the others. And so we may imagine did the nicely 
balanced mixture of anabolic and katabolic proteins 
finally become elaborated into protoplasm. Innumer- 
able compounds must, of course, have failed to establish 
themselves in this way owing to too great fixity or too 
great instability. For many reasons it seems probable 
that life originated in the sea; protoplasm contains the 
same elements as sea-water, and in much the same 
proportions. 

Speculating further, we may suppose that it became an 
advantage for some of this vaguely defined metabolising 
substance to become separated off into individual masses, 
which came to acquire the structure of cells. From this 
point onwards we can appeal to known evidence for our 
history of the evolution of life. 


CHAPTER II 


THE CELLULAR STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS : 
REPRODUCTION AND DEATH 


ALTHOUGH all living organisms necessarily contain some 
protoplasm, yet they are far from being entirely made up 
of it. All the parts of an organism are not truly alive, 
but only that portion which is protoplasmic. However, 
the substances of which it is composed are either about 
to be assimilated into protoplasm, or are the products of 
protoplasm. Indeed the great bulk of a plant or animal 
may be formed of the accumulated products of its past 
activity. Such, for instance, is the woody supporting 
tissue of a tree, the skeleton of a coral, the shell of a 
snail, the bony substance or hair in ourselves. While 
the living element is continually undergoing change, the 
dead deposit may continue unaltered during the life of 
the organism, and even afterwards. 

A microscopic examination of living organisms teaches 


22 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


us that the protoplasm is always present in the form of 
cells. We now come to another of the great generalisa- 
tions of biology: the so-called “cell theory,” founded by 
Schleiden and Schwann more than seventy years ago, and 
much modified and extended since then. Briefly it may 
be summed up as follows: The cell is a small mass of 
protoplasm consisting of a nucleus and surrounding cell- 
body. All plants and animals are made up of such cells, 
either singly or in aggregates. Growth is due to the 
increase in size and multiplication of the cells. They 
reproduce by division into two, and all the cells of the 
body of an individual are thus derived from a single 
original cell. Differentiation in multicellular organisms 
is related to the progressive division of labour among 
the cells, comparable to the division of labour among the 
individuals of a civilised community. The body of a 
multicellular organism is thus an aggregation, not of 
separate units brought together, but of a multitude of 
related cells remaining in association, and building up its 
tissues. Asarule the tissue-cells remain in actual proto- 
plasmic continuity; but in animals certain cells may 
become free and lead a quasi-independent life, as for 
instance the white corpuscles of the blood. The activity 
of an organism is the sum of the activities of its com- 
ponent cells. All living phenomena are ultimately ques- 
tions of cell-life ; all organic products due to the action 
of cells (Fig. 1). 

While the cell-body consists of ordinary granular 
protoplasm (cytoplasm), the nucleus is formed of special 
protoplasm differing from it both in structure and in 
chemical composition. In the nucleus may be distin- 
guished by appropriate methods, besides a more fluid 
nuclear sap, a meshwork of substance known as linin, in 
which are suspended masses of another substance called 
chromatin, from the fact that it colours deeply with 
certain stains after having been killed and coagulated 
with appropriate reagents. 


STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS. 23 


For the life of a cell both body and nucleus are essen- 
tial. An interchange of material takes place between 
them; one cannot live without the other. If a cell is 
divided into halves, only that which contains the nucleus 
will continue to live, grow, and reproduce. The cell is 
the smallest known unit of life. 

In the Bacteria there is no well-defined nucleus, the 
chromatin being scattered. They probably represent a 


Fia. 1.—Enlarged view of stained microscopic preparations to show the 
structure and multiplication of cells and their nuclei in plant tissue 
A (section through the tip of a root), and in animal tissue B (epi- 
thelium of the gill of a larval Salamander). a, b,c, d represent 
successive stages in the divisions of cells. 


primitive condition before the typical cell-structure was 
completely differentiated. 

Among the lowest plants, Protophyta, and the lowest 
animals, Protozoa, the whole individual consists of a 
single isolated cell, which consequently has to perform all 
the functions of life. Such organisms may, nevertheless, 
become highly differentiated, developing special cell- 
organs—a mouth for taking in food, motile processes for 
locomotion, contractile vacuoles for excretion, and so 


24 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


forth. But in the multicellular plants, Metaphyta, and 
animals, Metazoa, where the cells form tissues and organs, 
starting from primitive cells capable of performing 
all the essential processes of life (irritable, metabolic, 
growing, and reproductive) the cells become as differ- 
entiation advances adept at performing certain functions, 
but correspondingly incapable of carrying out others. 
The more they become adapted in special directions, the 
more they are apt to lose their other powers. So the 
cells of the alimentary, nervous, muscular, and other 
tissues of animals can only continue to live in association 
with each other, supplying each other’s wants. More- 
over, the specialised cells of differentiated tissues can 
usually only produce by division cells like unto them- 
selves, and may lose the power of reproducing at all. 

Multicellular organisms all start from a cell in a primi- 
tive undifferentiated condition, rich in unspecialised 
protoplasm, capable of becoming adapted to perform any 
of the necessary functions of life. Of such are built up 
the early embryonic stages, and the actively growing 
tissues of adults. But soon they become burdened with 
the accumulated products of their own activities, their 
potentialities are narrowed down, their irritability re- 
stricted so as to respond only to special stimuli, their 
capacity for regeneration exhausted. 

Speaking generally, the lower the organism the less 
differentiated are its cells, and the greater are their 
powers of growth and regeneration. A single cell of the 
fresh-water alga Vaucheria or of the fungus Mucor will 
grow into a new plant; the propagation of plants by 
cuttings is familiar. While the regenerating powers in 
a man are restricted to the simple growth of tissues, the 
healing of wounds and so forth, a newt or a crab will re- 
generate a whole limb ; a worm deprived of its head or 
tail will replace the missing parts; a fresh-water polyp, 
Hydra, may be cut into several pieces, each of which can 
grow into a complete animal. Speaking generally, also, 


STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS. 25 


the younger the organism the greater are its powers of re- 
generation. Thus the embryo of a sea urchin, while still 
composed of only a few cells, say two, four or eight, may 
be divided into two, four or even eight separate cells, each 
of which is capable of growing into a complete larva. 

All that is necessary for complete regeneration to take 
place is protoplasm retaining its potentiality of develop- 
ment, and present in sufficient quantity for metabolism to 
be carried out in full. So soon as the potentiality 
becomes limited by specialisation the power of regen- 
eration becomes restricted. 

We must now return to the consideration of the repro- 
duction of cells. A unicellular organism does not increase 
indefinitely in bulk ; when it exceeds that size which is 
normal for the adult of the species, it tends to divide into 
two. The nucleus divides first, then the cell-body, form- 
ing two daughter cells, each with its own nucleus. The 
daughter cells then separate, growing into adults similar 
to the original parent. It is the same with the cells of 
the higher organisms. Each multicellular animal or 
plant starts life as a single cell, which grows and divides 
repeatedly. In every case the nucleus divides, each half 
passing into one of the two daughter cells. But here, 
instead of the cells separating to lead an independent life, 
they remain more or less closely associated as parts of a 
single complex individual (Fig. 1). 

Thus not only is every cell derived from a pre-existing 
cell, but every nucleus is formed from a pre-existing 
nucleus, just as all protoplasm is derived from pre-existing 
protoplasm. The continuity of protoplasm, of cells, and of 
nuclei, is one of thé Most important facts established in 
modern biology. 

Rarely the nucleus divides “directly,” by simple con- 
striction into two halves; usually the division is “indirect,” 
by an elaborate process known as karyokinesis, and taking 
place as follows. The chromatin gathers together into a 
coiled thread, the linin network becomes disposed as a 


26 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


system of fibres radiating through the cytoplasm from 
two minute bodies, the centrosomes. Between these 
centrosomes the fibres join across, forming a spindle. 
The centrosomes can be seen to originate from the nucleus 
or its neighbourhood, as a single body which divides, the 
two halves moving to the opposite sides of the nucleus. 
The chromatic thread now breaks up into a definite 
number of separate pieces, the chromosomes, which 
arrange themselves in a circle round the equator of the 
spindle. Each chromosome now divides into two halves 
which travel to the opposite ends of the spindle. There 
they join together to form a thread; the thread breaks 
up into granules, the system of fibres disappears, and 
thus a new nucleus is reconstituted similar to the resting 
nucleus of the original cell.- A division of the cell-body 
then yields two nucleated cells (Fig. 1). Asa rule the 
centrosome persists to give rise to that of the next 
division. Now it is important to notice the continuity of 
substance during this process of division. Cytoplasm, 
linin, centrosome, and chromatin are all parcelled out to 
the two daughter cells ; above all each daughter nucleus 
receives the same number of chromosomes, and apparently 
exactly the same amount of chromatin. The number of 
chromosomes is approximately constant in each species, 
but differs widely even among allied forms. 

Although the process of karyokinesis may differ: in 
detail in various forms, yet it is essentially the same in all 
plants and animals. 

Why, it may be asked, has the cell structure been uni- 
versally adopted? To this question we can give no more 
definite answer than this: that there seems to be some 
proportion of mass to surface, and of nucleus to cytoplasm, 
within which it is necessary for the protoplasm to keep if 
metabolism is to be satisfactorily carried out. The size of 
cells varies considerably ; much more than the size of 
nuclei. It bears no direct relation to the size or com- 
plexity of the organism to which the cell belongs. A cell 


STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS. 27 


may be so small as scarcely to be visible with the high 
powers of the microscope, or as large as the yolk of an 
egg, for instance, the greater portion of which is, however, 
made up of yolk granules. 

If living organisms did not reproduce, they would 
sooner or later be extinguished, if not by natural at all 
events by accidental death. Therefore only those 
creatures survive which can multiply, and indeed multi- 
ply rapidly by the separation of some portion of their 
substance capable of growing into a new individual. 
This may give rise to a vegetative or asexual mode of 
reproduction by fission, or by the formation of special 
reproductive cells, or spores, or cellular bodies (buds). 
Mention has already been made above of asexual re- 
production in connection with growth and regeneration. 
Propagation by shoots developed on runners or on tubers 
is common among the higher plants, and gemmation or 
bud-formation is a widely distributed mode of reproduc- 
tion among animals. It is found not only among lowly 
organised forms like the zoophytes, and polyps (Ccelen- 
terata), and sponges (Porifera) ; but even in such highly 
differentiated groups as the marine bristle-worms (Cheeto- 
poda), sea-mats (Polyzoa), and sea-squirts (Tunicata), 
But while in the Bacteria asexual reproduction by fission 
and by spores is the only known method of propagation, 
in all other groups of. plants or animals sexual reproduc- 
tion occurs, though the asexual method may also be 
retained. 

The typical sexual reproduction of multicellular plants 
and animals takes place by means of special cells of two 
kinds set apart for the purpose, and called the germ-cells 
or gametes. Each gamete of one kind by fusion with a 
gamete of the other kind in the process of fertilisation 
gives rise to a single cell, the zygote, which grows into a 
new individual. The two kinds of cells have become 
differentiated along divergent lines, being adapted to the 
particular functions they have to perform. One, the 


28 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


ovum, is quiescent, stored with food-material to provide 
for the nutrition of the developing embryo, and is gener- 
ally of large size. The other, the spermatozoon of 
animals or spermatozoid of plants, is on the contrary 
small, active, and usually furnished with a vibratile whip- 
like “ tail,” with the help of which it bores its way into 
the ovum. The individual bearing ova is of the female 
sex; that bearing the spermatozoa, of the male sex. 
But the names male and female are often conveniently 
extended to the gametes themselves. Hermaphrodites 
give rise to both kinds of germ-cells. 

In fertilisation one male gamete fuses with one female ; 
and not only do the cell-bodies unite, but the nuclei of the 
cells also combine into one nucleus. Thus the nucleus of 
the resulting zygote contains chromatin from two in- 
dividuals, since the cells usually come from different 
parents. For it is only exceptionally that hermaphrodites 
are self-fertilising. Unsuccessful male gametes, which do 
not reach an ovum, perish sooner or later ; and likewise, 
unfertilised ova die, except in those rare cases where 
parthenogenesis occurs. Instances of parthenogenetic re- 
production are the fresh-water stonewort, Chara crinita, 
of which only females occur in northern Europe, and the 
plant lice (Aphidse) and certain other insects, which 
propagate in this manner in the summer. 

The differentiation of the germ-cells and of sex has had 
a profound influence on the evolution of organisms. To 
secure the nourishment, fertilisation, distribution, and 
survival of the reproductive cells is their chief function ; 
to this end have been developed that wonderful diversity 
and elaboration of structure, both bodily and mental, 
found in living nature. 

Among the unicellular forms sexual reproduction may 
be of a much simpler kind than that described above. 
Often one individual may divide up into a number of 
small “male” gametes, each capable of fertilising 
another individual playing the part of a “female” ovum. 


STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS. 29 


Or, as in many of the lower multicellular algz and in 
Monocystis, a parasitic protozoon found in the earth- 
worm, two individuals may each form a set of similar 
gametes without visible sexual differences, which may 
fertilise each other. Again, two similar whole individuals 
may fuse, and subsequently give rise to new cells; a 
common form of reproduction among fresh-water alge. 
The infusorian Paramecium merely exchanges cytoplasmic 
and nuclear material with another individual during a 
temporary union or conjugation. 

Although these various simpler modes of fertilisation 
do not in all probability represent actual phylogenetic 
stages in the evolution of sex, yet they give us some 
notion of how sex may have become developed. For its 
very first origin one must perhaps go back to that early 
time in the history of protoplasm before definite forms 
had become differentiated, and when it might have been 
beneficial for two masses of protoplasmic material, differ- 
ing slightly in composition, to mix and combine their 
properties together. 

But whatever may have been its origin, fertilisation 
now gives a necessary stimulus to development, and 
brings about some sort of rejuvenation. Even among 
those plants and animals which propagate freely asexu- 
ally recourse is had sooner or later to sexual reproduction. 
It would seem, as Biitschli maintained, that prolonged 
reproduction by fission in the protozoa in some way 
exhausts their vitality. Certain it is that under con- 
ditions which would lead to their death if unable to con- 
jugate, they can be seen to start with renewed vigour on 
a fresh career of growth and multiplication after conju- 
gation has taken place. 

It has already been mentioned that in multicellular 
organisms active growth occurs among the less differen- 
tiated cells which have retained a primitive richness in 
protoplasm, an embryonic character. Now the germ- 
cells, usually produced in enormous numbers, are derived 


30 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


from such undifferentiated cells set apart for the purpose 
of reproduction, sometimes from the very earliest stages 
of embryonic development. They may be traced back, 
and occasionally even be distinguished under the micro- 
scope through an unbroken lineage of embryonic cells to 
the fertilised ovum. 'Weismann’s famous theory of the 
continuity of the germ-plasm is founded on these facts. 
According to it, the germ-plasm, that special protoplasm 
of the gametes which is handed on by them from genera- 
tion to generation, and gives rise to new individuals, is in 
a sense independent of the body or soma in which it 
develops. Whereas the rest of the multicellular organism, 
the soma, undergoes differentiation and dies, the germ- 
cells continue for ever giving rise to new generations, the 
germ-plasm passing from parent to offspring. This brings 
us to the consideration of the origin and biological sig- 
nificance of death. 

Is death an essential inevitable attribute of life? If 
by death we mean mere decay, mere katabolic changes, 
the answer is yes. In this sense we begin to die as soon 
as we are born. But this is not what is meant by death 
in ordinary language. We do not speak of death unless 
there is a corpse. And the question is, putting aside ac- 
cidental death through violence or disease: does natural 
death occur always, or does it even occur at all? Would 
an organism shielded from all unfavourable conditions 
continue to live for ever, or is it wound up, so to speak, to 
live for only a limited time? It has already been men- 
tioned that among the bacteria and unicellular organisms 
propagation by a process of fission and spore formation 
may go on indefinitely if the conditions are favourable. 
True it is that the individual may be said to disappear in 
the splitting ; but death can have no sting for an organ- 
ism which divides into two living halves. Even when 
sexual union is necessary no corpse need be produced. 

Death, then, appears among living organisms when a 
soma or body becomes differentiated from the germ-cells. 


STRUCTURE OF ORGANISMS. 31 


_ The soma dies; but the germ-cells live on, passing from 
one mortal parent to another. As pointed out by Weis- 
mann, germ-cells, like the unicellular organisms just 
mentioned, are potentially immortal. Since the first 
appearance of living substance on this earth death has 
never interrupted the main streams of life. Death is, 
so to speak, a by-product of multicellular organisms. 

But even the soma might conceivably go on living for 
ever, provided only it continue growing, or the wear and 
tear of life be perpetually repaired. Weare familiar with 
plants which can be propagated by cuttings for an indefi- 
nitely long period, and we know of others, such as trees, 
which, preserving vigorous embryonic cells at their grow- 
ing surfaces, may prolong their natural life for thousands 
of years. Even in the best regulated organism, however, 
those essential proportions between surface and volume 
can hardly be so well preserved ; that nice co-ordination 
of parts, that power of repairing injuries and waste, can 
hardly be so accurately adjusted as to continue working 
smoothly forever. Especially is this the case in animals, 
where both size and shape are almost always definite and 
limited. If one may be allowed to use metaphorical 
language—rather than go on resisting the wear and tear 
of life, nature sacrifices the old and battered soma, and 
trusts the germ-cells to start a new individual afresh. 

So the length of life of an organism may become defi- 
nitely adapted to its needs; as in the case of annual 
plants and most animals, where the energies of the in- 
dividual are exhausted in securing the success in life of 
the next generation. Thus a large number of animals 
in the colder regions live only for one season, leaving 
behind them their eggs tosurvive the winter and develop 
next year. Frequently the male sex dies as soon as fer- 
tilisation has been accomplished. A definite relation 
can be traced between the length of life of the individuals 
of a species and the number of young produced, and the 
care required to bring them up. 


32 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


CHAPTER III 
DARWINISM AND HEREDITY 


ScaRcELY more than half a century ago Darwin, in his 
immortal work on The Origin of Species, first gave a 
satisfying truly scientific explanation of the evolution of 
living organisms. Before his time many authors had 
recognised that the various forms of life have been 
evolved from one another by gradual transformation. 
From the earliest times, indeed, philosophers had specu- 
lated on the possible modification of organisms, laying 
stress now on external environment, now on internal 
factors. All such speculations failed to convince, being 
either obviously inadequate, or calling in mysterious 
evolutionary forces of which no scientific explanation 
could be given. Darwin first clearly showed how over- 
whelming is the evidence that evolution has actually 
taken place; but his great merit is to have shown that 
it can be accounted for by the action of “natural causes,” 
which can be seen at work at the present time, can be 
tested by observation and experiment, and leave no room 
for any mysterious governing causes in addition ; that, 
in fact, a complete scientific aspect of the process of 
evolution can be described as an unbroken series of 
“natural” events, a sequence of cause and effect, a series 
of steps each one strictly determined by that which came 
before, and determining that which follows after. 
Darwin and Wallace simultaneously discovered the 
great principle of natural selection, the keystone of the 
Darwinian explanation of evolution. Like many great 
truths, when stated it appears extraordinarily simple and 
obvious. It can be described in the single phrase: the 
survival of the fittest in the struggle for existence. If we 
ask who are the fittest? the answer is—those which 
survive. This is no mere argument in a vicious circle ; 


DARWINISM AND HEREDITY. 33 


it is the definition of the word fittest from the point of 
view of the scientific observer. When one organism is 
said to be more or less fit than another, no aspersion is 
cast on the moral worth or esthetic beauty of either 
from a purely human standpoint; but the fact is ex- 
pressed that in the environment in which they live, one 
will succeed and the other fail. So when we speak of 
higher and lower forms in evolutionary series, we have 
jno desire to made invidious distinctions, but take into 
account the fact that some organisms are more complex 
and elaborate in their structure, bodily and mental, than 
others. 

According to Darwin, the chief factors which contrib- 
ute to the process of evolution are, variation, heredity, 
and the struggle for existence’ He pointed out that man 
has modified the characters (bodily and mental structure) 
of domestic animals and plants by continually selecting 
and breeding from those individuals which varied in 
directions favourable to his purpose, and gave the name 
natural selection to the similar process going on in nature. 
While the doctrine of evolution has been universally 
accepted, there is still much difference of opinion as to the 
relative importance of the various factors concerned. 

The impetus given by Darwin to the study of biology 
was enormous, especially with regard to variation and 
heredity, subjects which before his time had received 
little serious attention. We must now examine more in 
detail these factors of evolution. 

However closely related organisms may be, they always 
differ from each other: parents and offspring, brothers 
and sisters are never quite alike. The differences between 
them are called variations. Familiar to us among forms 
which we know well and observe closely, as for instance 
individuals of the human species, or our domestic animals 
and plants, variation is no less universally present among 
all sorts of living organisms. Variability occurs in vari- 


ous degrees, in all possible directions, and extends to 
(2,081) 


34 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


every sort of character, structural or functional. Shape, 
size, colour, scent, number and relative position of parts, 
are all subject to variation. The most complex capaci- 
ties, such as fertility, the power of resistance to disease, 
and intellectual ability are notoriously variable. More- 
over, variation occurs at every stage of life: the seed, 
seedling, young and adult plant, the egg, embryo, young 
and adult animal, all show variations. 

These variations can often be accurately measured, and 
the statistical study of variation begun by Quetelet and 
Galton, and carried on by W. F. R. Weldon, K. Pearson, 
and others, has yielded many important results. If we 
took a number of sticks picked up at random, and 
measured their length, we should find that while sticks 
of medium length are the most numerous, the sticks 
become rarer and rarer as they approach the extreme of 
length and shortness. If the number of sticks be large 
enough, the length occurring most frequently (the modal 
value or mode) would be found at or near the mean 
between the two extremes. In fact the length is, as we 
say, determined by chance, and the results obey the laws 
of probability, being due to a number of independent 
causes acting at random on the individual sticks. It is 
the same with variations, as shown by the examples on 
the following page. 

These results can be graphically represented in the form 
of a curve, which will be found to agree with a normal 
curve of error. The vertical passing through the apex of 
the curve will represent the mode, and the distance from 
it along the base will give the range of variation.* 

Asymmetrical or skew curves occur when for some 
reason the variation is more limited on one side than the 
other. 

These, then, are the materials from which natural 
selection has to choose; but to understand their nature 


* The reader is referred to Mr. Watson’s volume on Heredity, in this 
series, for a fuller account of variation and its mathematical treatment. 


DARWINISM AND HEREDITY. 35 


and importance in evolution we must analyse them 
further in the light of heredity. 

When the characters of the parent reappear in the off- 
spring we say in popular language that they are inherited. 
There is a mechanistic aspect of heredity just as there is 
of life. Why, we may ask, do the reproductive egg-cells 
of a snail, a fiy, and a fish, all under the same conditions, 
and bathed by the same water, reproduce the same 
bodily structure, the same functional capacities, the same 


Frequency of different lengths of beans measured by 
De Vries. 


bf 


Lengthinmm. .| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 4 | 15 | 16 


Number of beans. | 1 2 23 | 108 | 167 | 106 | 33 7 1 


Frequency of different types of beech leaves measured by 
K. Pearson. 


Number 
of veins |10/11];12] 138; 14] 15| 16] 17} 18] 19} 20} 21 
in leaf. 


Number of 
leaves of | 1] 71 341]110/ 318 | 479 | 595 | 516 | 307 | 181} 36] 15j 1 


each type. 


psychological powers, the same complex kind of individu- 
ality as each of the parent forms? The answer is that 
they are formed of the same protoplasm as the parent ; 
they are chips of the old block. Both parent and off- 
spring develop from the same starting-point ; a particu- 
lar mixture of substances, having a peculiar intimate 
architecture, or specific structure, and undergoing a 
particular kind of metabolic change. Under approxi- 
mately similar conditions they are bound to develop into 
approximately similar organisms. This particular kind 


36 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


of substance and particular association of qualities is 
transmitted by means of the reproductive cells; hence 
the importance of the principle of the continuity of living 
protoplasm established above (p. 25). The direct con- 
tinuity of living substance, obvious in the case of the 
unicellular organisms which reproduce by fission, is no 
less essential in all other modes of propagation. In this 
way only can the physico-chemical and other properties 
of one generation pass on to another. The process of 
metabolic change has continued without interruption since 
its first appearance from generation to generation. 

The full importance of heredity is perhaps, even yet, 
not always appreciated. This or that striking peculiarity 
reappearing in parent and child is pointed at as having 
been inherited, as if the countless resemblances in the 
whole organisation were not also dependent on heredity. 
Not only the similarities, but all the vast differences 
which distinguish man from the lowest animal have 
been built up through heredity. Without it no evolution 
could take place. For we must think of the continuous 
stream of protoplasm, the physical basis of evolution, as 
the means of piling up, so to speak, hereditary differences 
along diverging lines. 

In ordinary sexual reproduction, the specific substance 
containing the essential factors of inheritance must be 
passed on from one generation to the next in the germ- 
cells. It forms either the cell as a whole or only its 
nucleus ; many authors indeed identify it with the chro- 
matin. Moreover, it is carried in the germ-cells of both 
sexes, since inheritance is equal from both parents. The 
eharacters due to these factors usually reappear in the 
same order in the offspring in which they developed in 
the parent ; but some of them may remain for ever latent, 
though capable of reappearing in later generations. 

Now the older writers on evolution generally assumed 
that the course of heredity and the progress of evolution- 
ary change were greatly influenced by the direct action of 


DARWINISM AND HEREDITY. 37 


the external environment and of the characters of the 
parents on those of their offspring. It was supposed that 
the changes directly induced in the body of the parent by 
such stimuli as temperature, moisture, nutrition, repeated 
use, or exercise and disuse, are inherited as such, and 
would reappear in the progeny. The theories of evolu- 
tion propounded by Erasmus Darwin and by Lamarck 
were founded on this suppésition ; and even in the time 
of Darwin it was not yet questioned whether characters 
thus acquired by the parent in the course of its lifetime 
are directly inherited. It was not till Weismann criti- 
cally examined the evidence for “the inheritance of ac- 
quired characters” that the theory was definitely over- 
thrown. He showed convincingly that mutilations (such 
as the repeated cutting off of the tail in dogs), the effects 
of use and disuse (such as callosities produced by friction, 
the enlargement of muscles or other organs, the fruits of 
education, &c.), or any direct modification due to the 
action of any particular stimulus, have never in any 
single instance been proved to be transmitted as such 
from one generation to another, while the evidence that 
they are not is overwhelming. These conclusions of 
Weismann, which had been to some extent foreshadowed 
by Pritchard and Galton, are the most important con- 
tribution to the science of evolution since the publication 
of Darwin’s Origin of Species. Let us now examine the 
question more closely, and further analyse the “ varia- 
tions” dealt with above. 

Owing to that universal property of irritability or the 
power of response to stimuli already described, all organ- 
isms are the result of the interaction of two sets of 
factors : the factors of inheritance, and the factors of the 
environment. By factors of the environment we mean 
all those conditions or stimuli which are capable of in- 
fiuencing the differentiation, growth, behaviour, or in 
other words the metabolism of the organism. By factors 
of the inheritance, on the contrary, we mean that com- 


38 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


plex association transmitted from the parents of sub- 
stances with properties or capacities which make up the 
specific inheritance characteristic of each organism, and 
which may be called its assemblage of germinal factors, 
or its germinal constitution. Not only are organisms as 
we see them before us necessarily the results of the 
combined action of these two sets of factors ; but so also 
is every part of them, every structure, every activity, 
every organ, every habit. Therefore the characters 
observed and measured, dealt with in statistics and ex- 
periments, are likewise their products. The inheritance 
might be compared to a musical instrument, the stimuli 
to the player, and the organism and its characters to the 
music produced. What particular tune is produced will 
depend on the player; but the range of possible sound 
will be limited by the structure of the instrument, by the 
factors which make up its capacity to respond to the 
touch of the player. 

In a sense, then, every character, every variation, is 
partly acquired and partly inherited ; and no character 
%3 More acquired or more inherited than another. Hence 
the popular distinction between acquired and not ac- 
quired characters, between those which have been de-_ 
veloped in the course of the individual’s lifetime and 
those which are inborn, is misleading. The very terms 
involve a fallacy. We cannot point to this or that bodily 
or mental structure and say this is acquired and that is 
not. What we see before us is the result of both sets of 
factors in every case. 

And yet there are characters which reappear in off- 
spring and others which do not. The fact is that we 
must revise the popular conception of inheritance just as 
we have revised that of “acquired characters.” 

Obviously if either of the sets of factors be altered the 
resulting organism will be changed ; variation will occur. 
What is called the normal mental or bodily structure is 
that developed under the usual complex of environmental 


DARWINISM AND HEREDITY. 39 


stimuli. Any divergence from this normal structure may 
be due either to some change in the germinal constitution 
in a constant environment, or to an altered environment 
acting on an unchanged germinal constitution. The two 
results differ to some extent; they should not be called 
respectively inherited and acquired, the real distinction 
being that in the one case the new character is called 
forth by a new stimulus, whereas in the other case the 
stimulus remains unchanged, but brings forth a new 
result because it acts on altered germinal factors. This 
new deviation or change of character, the variation, will 
reappear in succeeding generations, provided the stimulus 
be present also. 

That new character (varzation) which is due to ger- 
minal change will always reappear in a constant environ- 
ment, provided the germinal constitution continues the 
same. The other new character (variation) will never 
reappear unless the causal stimulus is also present. If 
the new stimulus be removed the character necessarily 
goes also. The real difference between characters which 
always appear and those which do not is that the former 
depend on stimuli which are always present, while the 
latter depend on stimuli which may be absent. 

It follows that there are two quite distinct kinds of 
variation for which new names must be found. The 
name “mutations” may be adopted for differences due 
to the changes in the inheritance, to the alterations in 
germinal constitution ; and we may call “modifications” 
those induced by changes in the factors of the environ- 
ment. The former are transmitted in the germ-plasm, 
but not the latter. By mere inspection these two kinds 
of variations cannot, of course, be recognised ; they can 
only be distinguished by systematic observation and 
experiment. A few instances will help to make this 
clear. 

At first sight nothing could appear more firmly fixed 
by heredity than the greenness of plants; for countless 


40 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


generations green plants have reproduced themselves on 
earth. Yet take the seed of the greenest plant you like, 
and grow it in a dark cellar—the new plant will come up 
not green at all. The stimulus of light has been denied 
it, so the green “character” does not appear; it is not 
transmitted. But the capacity to become green is never- 
theless transmitted, as can be shown at once by bringing 
the pale seedling into the light, when it will soon turn 
green. This capacity depends on the factors constituting 
the inheritance. Just in the same way, if the seed be 
sown in soil devoid of iron the young plant will not be 
green, however much light there may be; the stimulus 
of iron has been removed. Add a trace of iron to the 
soil, and the plant will turn green. Again, Englishmen 
in the tropics become sunburnt ; this “character,” dark 
pigmentation, is due to the interaction between the en- 
vironmental stimulus, sunlight, and the transmitted 
germinal constitution. Their children will be likewise 
sunburnt, provided they are exposed to the rays of the 
tropical sun. But they will not be sunburnt if they are 
sent home to England. Once the maximum effect of the 
stimulus has been reached, once the maximum response 
has taken place, they will not be increasingly burnt, 
however many generations of their parents may have 
lived in the tropics ; and the children, if removed from 
the action of the sun, will not be sunburnt at all. The 
negro, on the other hand, will continue to be black and 
his children will be black, even when he lives in a tem- 
perate climate among white fellow-men. For the black 
character of the negro is called forth not by the external 
stimulus of sunlight, but by some other external or in- 
ternal stimuli which are not removed when he changes 
his abode. 

This example illustrates a most important principle in 
the evolution of organisms. Obviously those characters 
will be most constant which depend for their appearance 
on ever present stimuli. And, except in so far as an 


DARWINISM AND HEREDITY. 4] 


organism can choose its environment, the so-called in- 
ternal stimuli are those whose presence is most assured. 
An organism, therefore, must have such a germinal 
transmitted constitution that it can develop fully under 
the ordinary stimuli of its environment, and it will 
develop fully with the greater certainty the more it does 
so with the help of internal stimuli. Hence, in the 
struggle for existence, those may succeed best which are, 
so to speak, freed from the dependence on merely ex- 
ternal stimuli. This explains the importance of self- 
regulating processes. A familiar instance is that of the 
warm-blooded mammals. In them has been evolved an 
automatic mechanism for keeping the temperature of the 
body at the most favourable point for the carrying on of 
the process of metabolism, and they have become thus 
to a great extent independent of the changes in their 
environment ; while the cold-blooded reptiles and in- 
sects, for instance, are at the mercy of the surrounding 
temperature, unable to live an active life except in warm 
weather. 

Two more very instructive examples may be mentioned 
to illustrate our discussion on the factors of inheritance. 
Many plants live both in the alpine heights and in the 
low plains, and acquire a characteristic structure in these 
two different habitats. So different in appearance may 
the two forms become, that a botanist, not knowing of 
their common origin, would certainly place them in 
separate species. Now, the French botanist Bonnier 
divided a common dandelion (Taraxacum vulgare), and 
grew one half in the lowlands and the other half in the 
mountains. While the former grew into a tall and slender 
plant, the half raised in the alpine heights grew into a 
plant of very different appearance, with longer roots, 
much shorter stems, smaller and more hairy leaves, 
larger and brighter flowers. Each variety will reproduce 
its like in its own locality ; but seeds of the alpine plant 
will produce only the lowland form if sown there, and 


42 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


vice versa, the seeds of the lowland form will grow into 
the alpine form in the mountains. Moreover, if either 
form be transplanted into the other region, it will soon 
grow into the variety characteristic of its new habitat. 
This change is accomplished by the new-growing tissues, 
for the already formed tissues are no longer capable of 
altering. Once fully differentiated they are “fixed.” So 
we see that organisms are moulded by their environ- 
ment ; it is not the developed result which is transmitted, 
it is not the modification which is inherited, but the 
capacity for modification in certain directions, the 
modifiability. 

The other example is taken from some experiments on 
Primula sinensis, a well-known garden plant of which 
there are several constant races or varieties with different 
coloured flowers. If the variety with red flowers (P. s. 
rubra) be grown in a hot-house at a temperature of be- 
tween 15° and 20° centigrade, it will yield white flowers. 
Brought back to a normal temperature it will again 
bring forth red flowers. Which modification appears 
depends on the stimulus. Now, there is another variety 
(P. s. alba) which has white flowers at any temperature 
from the normal to 20°. At atemperature between 15° 
and 20° these two varieties would both bear white 
flowers, yet they would not be the same; they differ in 
their hereditary factors, in their modifiability. In one 
ease the factors are such that they remain unresponsive 
to change of temperature, in the other case they are 
responsive. 

The argument may be briefly summarised as follows : 
An organism is moulded as the result of two sets of 
factors: the factors or stimuli which make up its en- 
vironment, the conditions under which it grows up ; and 
the factors of inheritance, the germinal constitution, 
transmitted through its parent by means of the germ- 
cells. No single part or character is completely “ac- 
quired,” or due to inheritance alone. Every character 


DARWINISM AND HEREDITY. 43 


is the product of these two sets of factors, and can only 
be reproduced when both are present. Only those char- 
acters reappear regularly in successive generations which 
depend for their development on stimuli always present 
in the normal environment. Others, depending on a new 
or occasional stimulus, do not reappear in the next 
generation unless the stimulus is present. In popular 
language the former are said to be inherited, and the 
latter are said not to be inherited. But both are equally 
due to factors of inheritance and to factors of environ- 
ment; in this respect the popular distinction between 
acquired and not acquired characters is illusory. In 
every case it is the capacity to acquire, to become modified 
or to respond, which is really transmitted ; the direction 
and extent of the modification depends on the stimulus 
encountered. The presence of a given hereditary factor 
cannot be determined by mere inspection of the characters 
of an organism ; the factor may be present, but the cor- 
responding character fail to show itself owing to the 
absence of the necessary stimulus. On the other hand, 
dissimilar stimuli acting on different factors may give 
apparently similar results. Heredity must be defined 
afresh as the transmission of the factors of inheritance, 
and not as the reappearance of characters in successive — 
generations. 

Modifications, then, are not transmitted as such. They 
could only be “transmitted” if the new environment 
produced such a change in the factors of inheritance 
themselves, that when replaced in the old environment 
they continued to respond as if the new stimuli were still 
present. We will not say that such a thing is impossible ; 
but it is in the highest degree improbable, and it is very 
difficult to conceive how such a result could be reached. 
At all events no case of the supposed transmission of 
modifications has yet been brought forward which could 
not be explained in other ways. 


44 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


CHAPTER IV 


VARIATION AND THE FACTORS OF INHERITANCE: 
DETERMINATION OF SEX 


Let us return again to the consideration of the variation 
universally shown among all living organisms. Within 
the range of modifiability of a given organism the modi- 
fication may vary in amount according to the duration 
or intensity of the stimulus. Could we obtain a large 
number of creatures all endowed with the same inherit- 
ance, and grow them under perfectly uniform conditions, 
they would give rise to exactly similar individuals— 
there would be no variation. Grown on the contrary 
under variable conditions, the resulting diversity would 
give us a measure of the modification. In the same way 
with a number of individuals grown under exactly the 
same conditions, the resulting variation would give us a 
measure of the hereditary differences. Such simple con- 
ditions are never quite realised in nature or in experi- 
ments ; but we can get approximations. 

Take, for instance, the case of the beans worked out by 
Johannsen. 

The flowers of the common bean, Phaseolus vulgaris, 
fertilise themselves; all the offspring of one bean, then, 
may have approximately the same hereditary factors. 
Since the weight of the bean-seeds is affected by various 
independent environmental factors, such as number and 
position of the beans in the pod, richness of the soil, light 
and shade, and so forth, and the particular combinations 
of favourable and unfavourable stimuli fall haphazard on 
each particular bean, the variation in weight of the beans 
of each plant will be found to follow the normal curve of 
probability {p. 34). The mean weight will be the most 
frequent, and round it the modifications will fiuctuate 
in decreasing number towards the two extremes. Now, 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 45 


Johannsen took a number of beans from a large field, and. 
found that the offspring of each differed to some extent 
from that of the others in the position of the mean weight. 
While the whole population of beans varied between 
20 and 90 centigrams, the offspring of one bean might 
vary between 20 and 65 centigrams with a mean of about 
50, and the offspring of another between 40 and 90 with 
a mean of about 60 centigrams. So the curve of varia- 
tion of the whole population is made up of a number 
of curves, each of which has its own mean, each of which 
corresponds to a strain derived from one bean. Each 
strain, with its own inheritance giving a characteristic 
mean round which fluctuation may take place, is called 
a “pure line.” Inheritance is uniform within each pure 
line, so that light or heavy beans taken from the same 
line will yield offspring varying about the mean charac- 
teristic of the line. A bean weighing 55 centigrams 
might belong to either of the pure lines mentioned above ; 
to which of them it belongs would only be revealed by the 
average weight of the beans derived from it. 

_ If the various strains making up a population were 
really pure, of uniform inheritance, then under uniform 
conditions they should yield, not an even curve, but a 
series of steps—there would be a sudden jump from one 
strain to the other. It is, therefore, the modifications 
which smooth down these steps to a graduated curve 
corresponding to the variation of all the strains com- 
bined. 

Pure lines can rarely if ever persist in nature, except 
perhaps in such forms as Bacteria, where sexual reproduc- 
tion is not known to occur. Even here inheritance must 
sooner or later split into new strains owing to some altera- 
tion in its factors. But practically all organisms repro- 
duce sexually ; there is a perpetual crossing and mixing 
of strains, self-fertilisation being quite abnormal. With 
these few exceptions, factors of inheritance are brought 
into the zygote by the gametes of two parents. What 


46 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


happens in such a case? For an answer we, must turn 
to the facts and theories of heredity. 

In his great work, Animals and Plants under Domesti- 
cation, Darwin brought out the provisional hypothesis 
of Pangenesis, the first complete corpuscular theory of 
heredity. He supposed that each cell of an organism 
gives off a living gemmule or pangene, that the pangenes 
are collected together in the germ-cells, and that they 
give rise in the next generation to cells similar to those 
from which they have been derived. Darwin thus sug- 
gested a means of transmission both for hereditary factors 
and for modifications in accordance with the views then 
prevalent. When Weismann showed that modifications 
are not transmitted as such, the first part of the hypo- . 
thesis of Pangenesis became unnecessary, and his elabo- 
rate theory of inheritance by means of corpuscles, the 
determinants, is an extension of Darwin’s theory of the 
distribution of the pangenes from the germ-cells in 
development. Each independently variable organ or cell 
is supposed to be represented in the germ-plasm by a 
separate determinant, itself compounded of several of 
the hypothetical ultimate units of life, the biophors. 
These, and the determinants formed of them, are sup- 
posed to multiply, and to be transmitted along the con- 
tinuous stream of germ-cells. Ingenious as is the theory, 
it depends too much on unproved assumptions to carry 
conviction ; moreover, when applied in detail it soon 
lands us in a maze of difficulties from which there appears 
to be no escape. As we pointed out in the first chapter, 
life is not the attribute of any one special substance, and 
the conception of unit biophors is not really tenable. 

Modern theories of the mechanism of heredity, while 
less comprehensive are more satisfying, because they are 
based on direct observation and experiment, and depart 
as little as possible from the conclusions immediately 
deducible from the evidence. They were founded on the 
work of Mendel, whose observations and conclusions 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 47 


published in 1866 were not appreciated at that time, and 
lay neglected and forgotten until again brought to light 
in 1900 by the botanists Correns, Tschermak, and De 
Vries. The illuminating researches of Mendel have since 
been confirmed and extended by a vast number of ob- 
servers, among whom one may mention Bateson, Punnet, 
and Doncaster, in this country. 

The laws of inheritance have been worked out by cross- 
ing closely allied races of plants and animals differing 
from each other by certain easily recognisable characters, 
and observing the results in the subsequent generations. 
For example, if two individuals of the snap-dragon 
(Antirrhinum majus) are crossed, one belonging to a con- 
stant race with crimson flowers and the other belonging 
to a constant race with ivoryywhite flowers, the hybrid 
offspring will all bear pink flowers like those of neither 
of the parents. But if these hybrids are now inbred 
(crossed among themselves), a second generation will be 
obtained of mixed character. One quarter of this second 
generation will bear crimson flowers like those of the © 
first parent, two quarters (half of the whole number) 
will bear pink flowers like those of the first hybrid, 
while the remaining quarter will produce white flowers 
like those of the second parent. The crimson and the 
white-flowered plants of this second generation will breed 
true if crossed among themselves, like the original pa- 
rental stocks; but the pink-flowered plants will never 
breed true. On the contrary they will always split, like 
the original hybrid, into three kinds and in the same 
proportions (lIn—2n—1n). This example well illustrates 
the fundamental principle of the segregation of the heredi- 
tary factors in the gametes of the hybrid individual, 
which is the foundation stone of Mendel’s theory of 
heredity. The facts are accounted for as follows: 
Individuals belonging to each of the constant parent 
stocks give rise to germ-cells or gametes of similar in- 
heritance ; all the gametes of the first parent will con- 


48 HVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


tain the factor producing the crimson character, all the 
gametes of the second parent the factor producing the 
white character. On crossing the two factors will meet 
in the zygotes giving rise to the hybrid offspring. If both 
factors were now transmitted to each of the gametes of 
the hybrid, it would of course breed true. The splitting 
of the offspring of the hybrids is accounted for on the 
simple supposition that the factors segregate ; that the 
crimson-producing factor passes into half the total num- 
ber of gametes, and the white-producing factor into the 
other half in each hybrid parent. The gametes are then 
“pure” in respect to the particular factor. It follows 
that when the gametes of the hybrids fertilise each other 
three kinds of zygotes will necessarily result; one half 
of the total number containing both factors will give rise 
to new hybrids ; while one quarter with white-producing, 
and one quarter with crimson-producing factors only will 
give rise to pure individuals like the parents. Another 
ease in point is the “Blue” Andalusian fowl, which 
never breeds true, being a hybrid between the Black 
Andalusian and the splashed White, both constant races. 
A cross between these two will always yield “ Blues” 
only ; while the Blues if interbred always split into In 
Black, 2n Blue, and 1n splashed White. 

True-breeding individuals, containing only one kind of 
gamete, are called homozygotes ; they have grown from 
zygotes formed by the union of gametes containing the 
same factors, and give rise to gametes of uniform value. 
Hybrids derived from mixed zygotes are called hetero- 
zygotes, and give rise to gametes of different factorial 
value, each factor or set of factors passing into half the 
total output of gametes. This conclusion is confirmed on 
crossing the offspring of the hybrid with the homozygote, 
when half the resulting generation will resemble the 
homozygote, the original pure parent, and the others will 
resemble the heterozygote. 

Now the hybrids or heterozygotes may be more or 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 49 


less intermediate in appearance between the two parent 
forms, or like neither of them (as in the case of the Blue 
Andalusian) ; or again they may closely resemble one of 
the parents. Indeed the resemblance of the heterozy- 
gotes to one of the homozygote parents may be so com- 
plete as to deceive a keen observer. For instance, as 
shown by Mendel himself, if two races of the common 
pea (Pisum satwum) be crossed, one being tall and the 
other dwarf, tne first heterozygote generation will all be 
tall. These interbred yield one-quarter dwarf plants, 
and three-quarters tall plants. Of these tall plants one 
in every three breeds true to tallness, is a tall homozy- 
gote, while the other two prove to be heterozygotes, 
splitting again into the three kinds. The character tall- 
ness, then, always shows itself in those individuals to whom 
its factor has been transmitted, whether they be homo- or 
heterozygotes. It dominates over the dwarf character 
which is suppressed ; and therefore the one is called the 
dominant character and the other the recessive. From 
this, and indeed from the whole study of heredity, it 
follows that we can never judge of the true inheritance 
or gametic constitution of an individual by mere inspec- 
tion of its “characters.” 

Since the phenomena of inheritance are dealt with in a 
special volume of this series, we will not attempt to give 
a complete account of the Mendelian interpretations, but 
will only summarise some of the main conclusions in so 
far as they affect the doctrine of evolution in general. 
It is held that in an organism a number of characters may 
be distinguished capable of varying independently, and 
of being isolated or followed separately in breeding ex- 
periments, and each depending on a special transmissible 
germinal factor or factors. These characters are known 
as “unit characters,” and the factors which govern them 
as “unit factors.” The whole inheritance would be 
made up of the sum of its unit factors. No character 


appears in an individual unless the corresponding factor 
(2,031) 4 


50 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


has been transmitted to it; yet it may inherit factors 
which remain undeveloped, and the presence of which 
may be revealed by their transmission to and effects on 
later generations. Now when two races are crossed, 
such as the tall and dwarf peas mentioned above, the two 
opposed or allelomorphic characters, as Bateson calls 
them, may be due not to the result of two different 
factors, in the one case representing tallness and in the 
other shortness, but merely to the presence in the first of 
a factor for tallness which is absent in the second. Thus 
a pure recessive would be without a factor present in the 
pure dominant and in the hybrid.* Moreover an appar- 
ently simple character may be due not to a single factor, 
but to the co-operation of several, which must all be 
present at the same time and in the same zygote for the 
character to appear. Yet they are sufficiently independ- 
ent to be capable of segregation, and to give rise each to 
some different character. Thus the colour of an animal 
or plant may be a complex character due toa group of 
factors transmitted as a whole, and so far constant in the 
species, but which can be analysed out into a number of 
separate strains, each breeding true to its own new 
colour. The grey colour of the wild mouse, for example, 
has been shown to depend on the co-operation of at least 
six different factors. Change any one of them and the 
resulting colour will be changed also. A colour factor 
may be unable to show itself in the resulting character, 
unless accompanied in the zygote by an independent 
colour-developing factor. Thus a white individual may 
hold colour factors, but appear as an albino because it 
lacks the essential colour-developing factor ; and there 
may be as many different varieties of partial albinos as 
there are colour factors in the species capable of segrega- 
tion. If crossed they will always breed true to albinism, 


* This “‘ Presence and Absence theory” is not universally accepted, 
many authors believing that both allelomorphic characters are i dl 
ssented in the germ-plasm by factors. 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 51 


since they are devoid of the necessary factor for the pro- 
duction of their colour. In certain cases whiteness seems 
to be due not to the absence of a factor, but to the 
presence of an inhibiting factor. Such a white race can 
behave as a dominant. A cross between a dominant 
white and a recessive white fowl will yield some coloured 
offspring in the second generation. So the factors may 
influence each other’s results when meeting in a zygote, 
may interact in such a way as to produce characters 
differing more or less completely from those produced by 
any of them separately. 

We have seen that when two varieties are crossed 
differing in the presence or absence of one hereditary 
factor, as with the tall and skort peas, a dominant and a 
recessive form result in the second generation, in the pro- 
portion of three to one. If, now, the varieties differed by 
two factors, as for instance tall purple-flowered and 
dwarf white-flowered peas, the hybrid would show both 
the dominant characters, would be tall and purple, and 
would give rise to four kinds of gametes in equal propor- 
tions. One might contain both factors, one the factor 
for tallness, one the factor for purple, and one neither 
factor ; the gametes would appear in equal proportions, 
since the factors segregate independently by “ chance.” 
The product of random fertilisation among these gametes 
will yield zygotes in the proportion of nine with both 
factors, three with the factor for tallness only, three with 
that for purple only, and one with neither, the pure 
“extracted recessive.” The number of possivle combi- 
nations increases rapidly with the number of factors. 

The most complete analysis of the factors of inheritance 
yet made is that of the fruit fly (Drosophila ampelophila), 
recently worked out by Prof. Morgan and his pupils. 
By breeding experiments about 125 different factors 
have been distinguished, the eye-colour alone being 
influenced by some 30. Moreover, it has been shown 
by ingenious experiments that these factors are carried 


52 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


in sets by individual chromosomes in the gametes, and 
further it is claimed that the actual position of the 
factors in the chromosomes can be determined. 

The conclusion is that the total inheritance transmitted 
in a gamete may be interpreted as made up of definite 
independent unit factors contributing to the develop- 
ment of corresponding characters. While the factors 
are either entirely absent or present, the characters due 
to them may be more or less developed according to inter- 
action with other factors of inheritance and with factors 
of the environment. The origin of at all events the 
majority of domestic races of animals and plants is ac- 
counted for on the theory that the complex of factors of 
inheritance possessed by the primitive wild form has been 
split up among a number of races, each distinguished by 
the loss of some factor or set of factors belonging to the 
original stock. The various domestic races of pigeons, 
fowls, sweet-peas, and so forth, would differ from each 
other in holding a different selection from out of the 
whole number of available original factors. If this were 
true we might expect to be able to bring together again 
the separated fragments of inheritance and reconstruct 
the complete set by crossing various races with the neces- 
sary elements. And this can indeed be done, giving rise 
to “reversion,” the reappearance of an ancestral com- 
bination of characters. Thus the original wild form of 
sweet-pea found in Sicily can be reconstructed by cross- 
ing the “Bush” and the “Cupid” domestic varieties. 
The “ Agouti” colour of the wild rabbit reappears on 
crossing a yellow with a Himalayan variety ; and the 
plumage of the wild “blue rock pigeon” (Columba livia) 
can be reproduced on crossing certain very unlike domestic 
races. 

But do all factors of inheritance “mendelise”? In 
answer to this question it may be said that the law of 
segregation, the law of Mendel, appears to hold good with 
all sorts of characters and in all sorts of plants and 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 53 


animals. No ‘thoroughly established case has yet been 
brought to light in which the factors have been proved 
not to segregate. Many of the supposed instances of 
blended inheritance, with the formation of series of inter- 
mediates, have been shown to be due not to failure of 
segregation, but to incomplete dominance, multiplicity 
of factors, direct effect of environment, and other com- 
plications which blur the result. Yet there are still some 
cases known, such as the colours of human races, which 
have so far defied analysis into segregating factors ; and 
it seems possible, in the light of recent work, that the 
rule is not universal, and that segregation may sometimes 
be incomplete or even not occur at all. 

Now most of these experiments have been made on 
domestic varieties, differing,from one another by only 
a few well-marked unit characters ; differences due prob- 
ably to the dropping out of certain hereditary factors, to 
“retrogressive mutations.” We may now inquire what 
happens if two natural “species” are crossed. This is a 
most interesting question, and one directly affecting the 
general problem of evolution, since the experiment might 
possibly reveal some hidden but genuine distinction 
between a “species” and a “variety.”. The variety 
might mendelise but not the species; as, indeed, was 
suggested by De Vries. Such, however, does not appear 
to be really the case ; but the problem is much compli- 
cated owing to the large number of factors of varying 
importance which may distinguish two even closely 
allied natural “species.” In so far as some of the unit 
characters are conspicuous and dominant, it may be 
possible or even easy to trace out the segregation in later 
generations; but the task may become too difficult if 
the distinguishing characters are small and very numer- 
ous. In such a case thousands of “intermediate” 
heterozygotes may be produced, each with its particular 
inheritance, and a bewildering number of intermediate 
forms result. This is after all perhaps not a matter of 


54 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


great general importance, since hybridisation, or the 
crossing of different “species,” can play but a small part 
in evolution, and need hardly be considered as a factor 
at all. 

The term “unit” character is apt to be misleading. 
For practical purposes it is convenient to fix the attention 
on some conspicuous result, such as the colour of a flower 
or the height of a plant, but it must always be remem- 
bered that the influence of the factor may—possibly 
always does—extend over the whole organism. 

In Chapter ITI. it was shown that two kinds of varia- 
tion can be distinguished : modifications and mutations. 
The latter alone are due to changes in the inheritance, 
and may be further classified into retrogressive mutations, 
due to the loss of some factor, and progressive mutations, 
due to the gain of some factor.* 

Of the origin of progressive mutations we know practi- 
cally nothing. So far as experiment has shown, the multi- 
tudes of domestic varieties of our plants and animals are 
all, or almost all, of a retrogressive kind ; that is to say, 
are due to the separation and rearrangement of the factors 
of inheritance already present, not to the addition of new 
factors. New characters may thus come out, but the 
unit factors remain the same though apparently reduced 
in number. 

Similar retrogressive mutations are known to occur in 
nature. Common instances are albino animals and white- 
flowered plants. The botanist De Vries, who has made 
a special study of these variations, has collected and 
studied a large number of cases. But it cannot be that 
all mutations are of this negative nature. All the differ- 
ences that distinguish man from the primitive stock 
whence arose the whole animal kingdom can hardly be 


* Mutations, whether progressive or retrogressive, are not necessarily 
related, as might be supposed, to the complicated changes undergone by 
the chromatin in the maturation of the germ-cells, since they occur in the 
Bacteria, and among other forms which reproduce asexually. 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 55 


due to man having lost certain factors which this early 
ancestor possessed, or to the factors being shuffled. At 
some period in evolution new factors must have been in- 
troduced into the inheritance, and the process is presum- 
ably still going on. 

Speculating as to the possible origin of mutations we 
are inevitably led to the conclusion that any transmis- 
sible differences arising between two originally identical 
germinal constitutions formed of the same factors of in- 
heritance must come from the environment; for any 
closed system must reach a state of equilibrium, and con- 
tinue unchanged unless influenced from without. Muta- 
tions, then, are produced by the addition to, subtraction 
from, or alteration in, the faptors of inheritance already 
present. 

This whole system of factors may appear to the reader 
somewhat artificial; yet it is the legitimate deduction 
from facts for which no other explanation can at present 
be given. What the factors are we can only surmise. 
They are not distinct corpuscles of living matter like the 
hypothetical gemmules of Darwin or biophors of Weis- 
mann, representing separate cells or parts of the organ- 
ism. Rather should they be conceived as definite 
chemical substances forming part of, or entering into, 
the chain of metabolising compounds and thereby in- 
fluencing the course of metabolism in such a way as to 
bring about a certain definite result. 

If such a substance is destroyed, or fails to pass into 
the gamete, a retrogressive mutation arises. If the 
physico-chemical structure of a factor is altered by the 
shifting and rearrangement of the chemical atoms, for 
instance, a mutation may result. A truly progressive 
mutation would be produced when new atoms or com- 
pounds become permanently involved in the metabolic 
cycle of the germ-plasm. 

One must be careful not to assume that because a 
character appears to vary independently it is necessarily 


56 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


represented by a separate substance, present from the be- 
ginning in the germ. Such a supposition would soon 
lead us into that tangle of difficulties which have proved 
fatal to the corpuscular theories of heredity. It is the old 
controversy between the supporters of “epigenesis” and 
“evolution” in development (evolution being used here 
in the restricted sense of an unfolding during ontogeny 
of parts already present on a small scale in the germ). 
While the latter held that the parts of the adult are de- 
veloped by the mere unfolding of corresponding elements 
preformed in the germ, the “epigenetists” held that 
they are formed de novo in every embryo from an un- 
differentiated substance. In modern language we should 
say that the structure of the adult is gradually developed 
by a series of epigenetic changes, each one of which is 
strictly determined by the stage preceding it, and strictly 
determines that which follows it. So every feature of 
a landscape, every detail of a melting view, is doubtless 
strictly predetermined by the nature of the geological 
strata and the surrounding conditions, but cannot be said 
to have been preformed in previous geological epochs. 
If every separately variable character had to be repre- 
sented by a separate unit the number of units in every 
gamete would become fantastically large. Moreover, 
characters are variable independently at different stages 
of growth—not the butterfly only, but the chrysalis, 
the caterpillar, and the egg may vary ; must there be a 
unit for every stage of every character? Again, it is 
difficult to account for the marshalling and development 
of all these units in proper order without calling in the 
aid of some mysterious governing force. These are some 
of the difficulties which have led to the downfall of the 
corpuscular theories of heredity. 

Great as has been the advance in our knowledge of the 
inheritance of characters through breeding experiments 
conducted on mendelian lines, there is some danger of 
the factorial theory becoming a mere formal explanation 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 57 


of results. So far we are presented with a picture of 
independent particles without any clue as to how they 
co-operate or succeed in producing the finished result. 
Students of genetics are apt to overrate the importance 
of an explanation of the mere mechanism of transmission. 
Not until the factors have been brought into relation 
with the general metabolism, with growth and repro- 
duction, will the theory of heredity approach com- 
pletion. 

It is not possible as yet to describe scientifically the 
process of embryonic development, but some sort of 
epigenesis there must be. All we need assume is that 
there are factors enough in the inheritance to produce a 
certain definite result. When, under the same conditions, 
the results come to differ, when a mutation arises, no 
doubt some corresponding change must have taken place 
in the inheritance, some alteration in the composition and 
properties of what we vaguely call the factors (p. 52), 
A consideration of the changes undergone by complex 
chemical compounds may give us some notion of what 
the factorial changes may be. The student of Organic 
Chemistry is familiar with long series of closely allied 
compounds, formed of molecules often containing vast 
numbers of atoms. The properties of these compounds 
all differ from one another, owing to the elements not 
being the same, or to their not being present in exactly 
the same proportions, or again to their being differently 
grouped within the molecule. The properties may be 
altered at will by removing this or that atom, by intro- 
ducing a new element, by substituting one group for 
another, or by merely shifting the grouping within the 
molecule. The resulting changes will be definite, will 
appear large or small, important or not, according as they 
strike our senses. In some such fashion do we imagine 
the changes occur in the factors of inheritance. 

Mutations are generally said to arise spontaneously ; 
this, of course, is only another way of saying that we do 


58 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


not yet know what causes them to appear. Darwin be- 
lieved that great and sudden changes in the environment 
increased variability, a conclusion which is probably well 
founded, but is difficult to prove, since we know so little 
about. the range of variability in nature under usual and 
unusual conditions. Some recent experiments seem to 
have clearly established the most interesting fact that 
mutations can be brought about by altering certain 
stimuli in the environment. But it must not be for- 
gotten that the experimental conditions may only have 
favoured the survival of pre-existing mutations, and not 
actually caused their first appearance. The American 
investigator Tower, experimenting on the Colorado 
beetle (Leptinotarsa), found that on exposing some in- 
dividuals at a certain stage and for a certain time to 
extremes of heat and dryness there appeared in their 
offspring beetles differing remarkably from the parents 
in colour and pattern. That these new forms were real 
mutants, and not modifications, was proved by their 
breeding true under normal conditions, and when crossed 
with the parent form giving the proper mendelian pro- 
portion of parent and new types in the second generation. 
Similar results have been obtained by Morgan with the 
fly Drosophila, and by others with plants. For factorial 
ehanges of this kind to produce lasting results, constant 
inheritable mutations, they must of course be persistent. 
It is a mistake to confuse, as is often done, such changes 
brought about by the direct effect of external or internal 
stimuli on the germ-plasm with alleged cases of the so- 
called inheritance of acquired characters. 

These artificial mutations are all of the retrogressive 
kind, and the mutants, the new forms, are all recessives. 
So that the result of the experiment is the loss or 
suppression of one or more of the factors of inheritance. 
But we may look forward to the possibility of being able 
some day to produce progressive mutations in any desired 
direction ; a discovery of such immense practical value 


FACTORS OF INHERITANCE. 59 


that it would eclipse even such triumphs as the practical 
application of electricity, or the use of steam power. 

A word may here be said about the determination of 
sex, although space will not allow us adequately to discuss 
this most interesting and important problem in evolution. 
_ What determines that a given individual shall be male, 
female, or hermaphrodite? Since, in the vast majority ~ 
of cases, when the sexes are separate, they appear in 
equal numbers, it might seem that here is an excellent 
instance of mendelian segregation. We may suppose, as 
Geoffrey Smith suggested, that one sex is a homozygote 
and the other a heterozygote for sex-determining factors. 
The heterozygote parent would then yield male-producing 
and female-producing gametes in equal numbers, and the 
sex of the offspring would bé determined at fertilisation. 
Working on quite different lines, M‘Lung, Wilson, and 
others have shown that in certain insects there are two 
kinds of spermatozoa, one with the normal number of 
chromosomes, and the other with one of these reduced in 
size or absent. These observations have been extended 
to other forms, and it is now established that in, at all 
events, a large number of organisms, the egg develops 
into a male or a female according as it is fertilised by a 
male-producing or female-producing gamete. Sex, then, 
would in these cases be determined from the first by the 
presence of the necessary germinal factors. Yet there 
are undoubted instances where the sex of an animal is 
influenced by the environment. In the case of the spider 
crab, IJnachus, attacked by the parasitie crustacean 
Saceulina, not only does the male undergo “parasitic 
castration,” and acquire the external characters of the 
female, as shown by Giard, but, as Geoffrey Smith proved, 
on recovery from the attack the male crab develops ova 
as well as spermatozoa. This seems to show that one 
sex may really carry the factors for both, a conclusion 
borne out by the well-known fact that female birds often 
in old age acquire the secondary sexual characters of the 


60 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


male. Further, Balzer has recently given evidence that 
the larve of the strange worm-like animal Bonellia become 
either female or male according as they live an inde- 
pendent life or become parasitically attached to their 
mother. The difficult problem of the determination of 
sex cannot yet be considered as solved. The evidence 
seems to show that the sex of an individual is fixed in 
different ways and at different times. Some animals lay 
male-producing and female-producing eggs; among the 
Hymenopterous insects, such as the bee, the egg produces 
a female or a male according as it is or is not fertilised ; 
while in other cases, as mentioned above, sex is deter- 
mined by the kind of gamete which fertilises the ovum. 
Moreover, although in the vast majority of cases the sex 
of an individual appears to be irrevocably fixed at or 
before fertilisation, yet there is evidence that in certain 
cases it is influenced by environmental conditions. 


CHAPTER V 
THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE AND NATURAL SELECTION 


Or all the primary factors of evolution the struggle for 
existence is that which lends itself least to controversy. 
When once stated and understood it must be recognised. 
Unfortunately, it is not always understood. The phrase 
is a metaphor to express the undeniable fact that more 
organisms are born into the world than can survive in it. 
As Darwin says, unless “the truth of the universal 
struggle for life be constantly borne in mind the whole 
economy of nature, with every fact on distribution, 
rarity, abundance, extinction, and variation, will be dimly 
seen or quite misunderstood.” The enormous rate at 
which even the most slowly reproducing creatures are 
capable of increasing is not always fully realised. Organ- 


é 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 61 


isms have a tendency to increase in geometrical ratio; 
consequently their powers of multiplication are prodi- 
gious. To take an instance quoted by Wallace, a single 
pair of flies (Musca carnaria) produce 20,000 carrion- 
eating larve, which will hatch out into flies ready to re- 
produce in about a fortnight, giving rise in turn to some 
200 million hungry larve. Linnzus did not exaggerate 
when he said that a dead horse would be devoured by 
flies as quickly as by a lion. The fertility of parasites 
is proverbial: the eggs of tapeworms and other such 
internal parasitic worms may be counted by the million. 
Among the vertebrates the fish are the most prolific—a 
single cod can lay over nine million eggs, though of course 
they may not all be fertilised? Equally remarkable is the 
power of reproduction in plants. It has been ealculated | 
that a single cholera bacillus would give rise to sixteen 
hundred trillions of bacilli in a day if propagating freely, 
forming a solid mass weighing 100 tons. Doubtless, 
such unrestrained reproduction rarely if ever occurs; 
but every organism is, so to speak, ready to seize the 
opportunity of spreading to an indefinite extent and is 
trying, as it were, to extend its range, to colonise fresh 
regions. Every available spot, from the top of the high- 
est mountain to the lowest depth of the sea, is invaded, 
every possible mode of life is adopted, as far as adapta- 
bility will allow. The various organisms are packed as 
tight as possible, exerting mutual pressure. If any one 
increases, it is at the expense of some other. So the 
fauna and flora of an old established district are made up 
of a multitude of interdigitating species, availing them- 
selves of all the resources of the region, fitting close to- 
gether like the stones of a mosaic, and each occupying 
that place for which it is best suited. Under ordinary 
conditions a balance is soon struck, a state of unstable 
equilibrium established, in which the surviving forms 
have reached an average number of individuals about 
which they fluctuate within comparatively narrow limits. 


62 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


The severity of the struggle may vary according to age 
and the surrounding conditions, but it is never quite 
absent. Besides the competition for food, for light, for 
water, for space generally, and the unceasing struggle 
against unfavourable conditions of climate, there is the 
never-ending war against enemies, parasites, and dis- 
eases. All these factors contribute towards the death- 
rate of the species. 

How great are the possibilities of increase and how 
much they are kept in check under ordinary conditions, 
is seen when the balance of factors restraining it is in 
any way disturbed, as for instance owing to some change 
in the climate or the intervention of man. The occasional 
immense swarms of locusts, of butterflies or other insects, 
of lemmings, the great epidemics of diseases, are ex- 
amples of the temporary removal of barriers to repro- 
duction. Similar expansion of some one species at the 
expense of others is continually taking place on a small 
scale even in the most stable fauna and flora. The ex- 
traordinarily rapid increase of horses and cattle intro- 
duced by the Spaniards in South America, of rabbits in 
Australia, of terrible insect pests like the Phylloxera 
which attacked the vines in Europe, or the European 
gipsy moth (Lymantria dispar) which destroys the forest 
trees in North America, the spread of the watercress 
(Nasturtium officinale) blocking the rivers of New 
Zealand, or the American water-weed (Hlodea canadensis) 
filling the rivers of western Europe, these are only a few 
of hundreds of similar cases of the possible result of in- 
troducing a species into a new country where it does not 
meet with the ordinary checks occurring in its native 
habitat. 

Individuals of similar habits stand most in each other’s 
way ; therefore, competition is often more severe between 
closely allied than distantly related forms. It is most 
severe within the limits of the species itself, between 
individuals, families, tribes, and social aggregations. 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 63 


The intensity of the struggle may be judged by the 
death-rate. In a region where the population has 
reached a stationary state, the number of each species 
remains approximately the same. On the average, then, 
only one out of the whole progeny can survive to repre- 
sent each parent individual of the previous generation. 
All except these fortunate individuals are destroyed 
sooner or later before they have succeeded in leaving 
offspring to perpetuate their kind, or in securing the 
success in life of any of their progeny. The greatest 
amount of destruction takes place when the organisms 
are still quite young. 

The struggle for existence, natural selection, and adap- 
tation, are so intimately connected, that it is scarcely 
possible to treat of one of these without at the same time 
dealing with the other two. While the struggle may be 
considered as the primary factor, to the action of which 
the selection is due, it is also the very means whereby 
adaptation is brought about. The transmission of heredi- 
tary factors is, of course, necessary for the selection to 
be effective. Obviously natural selection acts merely as 
a sieve, separating individuals so formed as to survive 
in the struggle for existence, from others which are not. 
It may be represented equally well as a survival of the 
fit, or as an elimination of the unfit. This point is worth 
insisting on, because, strangely enough, it has been often 
brought forward as a serious criticism that natural selec- 
tion is, after all, merely a process of elimination. 

In the long-run those organisms less well adapted to 
survive will have less chance of leaving successful off- 
spring behind them, will be crushed out in the struggle, 
will be eliminated. The only difference between the 
well adapted and the badly adapted in a given environ- 
ment is that in the first case the total inheritance, the 
hereditary mechanism or factors, react to stimuli in such 
a way as to lead to success, while in the second case they 
do not. Selection, therefore, is between that kind of 


64 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


organisation which responds in the right way, and that 
which does not. If one may be allowed to speak meta- 
phorically, the problem before the organism is to acquire 
such an organisation that under given conditions it will 
react in the right way. Therefore, those individuals 
which vary in their hereditary organisation in the right 
direction necessarily have a better chance of succeeding. 
Success in the struggle is the only criterion of “right” 
and “wrong” in variation. The action of selection, it 
must be remembered, on the hereditary factors is in- 
direct, since it only acts on the combined product of 
these and the environment (see p. 38)—on the characters 
of the organism as presented to it. It is these characters 
and their variations which pass through the sieve. The 
scope of the selection is limited to the variations pre- 
sented ; its direction is determined by the environment. 
This direction will always necessarily be towards better 
adaptation ; adaptation is the keynote to evolution. If 
the right kind of variation does not occur the organism 
runs the risk of death, and will inevitably be exterminated 
if the struggle is severe enough. 

When the history of Biological Science in the last fifty 
years comes to be written, we fancy that the impartial 
historian will not dwell with much pride on the account 
of the criticisms of Darwinian doctrines, The violent 
attacks of theologians, based for the most part on ignor- 
ance and prejudice, may be forgiven and forgotten ; but 
many of the criticisms from the pens of the biologists 
themselves are scarcely better founded. It is often said 
that of late years Darwinism has lost ground, and that 
natural selection can no longer be regarded as a satisfyin 
explanation of, or even as an important factor in, the 
process of evolution. Doubtless there is some truth in 
the saying, at all events in so far as it appears that the 
doctrine is not what some misguided enthusiasts may 
have represented it to be, that it does not explain every- 
thing, that many problems remain unsolved. Yet the 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 65 


Darwinian theory still stands unassailable as the one 
and only rational scientific explanation of evolution by 
“natural” forces, whose action can be observed, tested, 
and measured. Nevertheless, the critics are quite right 
in demanding convincing evidence for every step in the 
argument. . 

The modern developments of the study of heredity and 
variation on mendelian lines, far from weakening the 
case for natural selection, seem to have definitely disposed 
of the only rival theory, the doctrine of Lamarck founded 
on the supposed “inheritance of acquired characters.” 
Fortuitous changes in the inherited organisation are left 
as the only elements of primary importance, the only 
stones of which the edifice is built. 

Misunderstanding lies at the root of many of the ob- 
jections urged against Darwinism. For instance, almost 
every detractor of natural selection has brought forward 
with wearisome reiteration the criticism that the theory 
does not account for the origin of variations. Of course 
it does not; it was never meant to do so. No one has 
tried to drive this point home more persistently than 
Darwin himself: “Some have even imagined that natu- 
ral selection induces variability, whereas it implies anty 
the preservation of such variations as arise ;” . . . “un. 
less such occur natural selection can do nothing” (Orzgin 
of Species). What selection alone can do is to preserve 
these variations, and to pile one individual difference on 
the top of another in the direction of adaptation, leading 
to ever increasing changes along divergent lines. 

Another “criticism” is that natural selection is nov 
the means whereby adaptation is brought about because 
organisms must have the desired structure before they 
are chosen, must be preadapted. But if by adaptation 
we merely mean the appearance of a favourable variation, 
the statement amounts to an obvious truism. Further, 
if by adaptation we merely mean that an organism has 


such a structure that it will live, all living things are 
(2,031) 


66 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


necessarily adapted—viability is the first test they have 
to pass. Any that fail to satisfy it are eliminated at once. 
But organisms in competition are further tested in par- 
ticular directions, and when we can see both the advan- 
tage gained and the means whereby it is obtained, the 
special structure evolved, we speak of it in teleological 
language as adapted for this purpose. Thus a sense 
organ becomes specially adapted to receive only certain 
stimuli; a flower is adapted to be fertilised by insects. 
Now each step in the formation of such a structure, each 
fortuitous favourable variation selected to build it up, 
may, in a sense, be said to have been preadapted. But 
the word adaptation also implies just that process of 
gradual building, that continued selection of variations 
in a particular direction from among variations in all 
other possible directions, which is represented in the 
elaborated organ, yet cannot in any intelligible sense be 
said to be present in each individual step. 

To prove that natural selection is a real working 
principle, it must be shown that the death-rate is selective. 
Unfavourable conditions, diseases, enemies of all kinds, 
dog the path of every individual from birth to death ; 
the death-rate is consequently enormous, as was shown 
above. But is it really selective? Are, for instance, the 
two flies which alone survive out of every 20,000 (p. 61) 
different on the average from those 19,998 which perish ? 
That is the important point now to be considered. 

Doubtless in many cases the death of organisms is due 
to pure “accident,” causes which exterminate without 
selective action, as for instance in the wholesale destruc- 
tion brought about by some natural cataclysm; but such 
eases must be comparatively rare, and may be neglected. 
Death of this kind simply fails to select; it does not 
prevent: it merely delays the work of selection. The 
survival of the fittest, the elimination of the unfit, is easy 
enough to prove in the case of well-defined races, species, 
and larger groups, and has been eloquently described by 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 67 


Darwin, Wallace, and others. Every observant naturalist 
now realises how intense is the struggle, how rapidly 
one species can be replaced by another, how completely 
the geographical distribution, the abundance or rarity, 
or the extermination of an organism is dependent on the 
success of its competitors. It is the selective action of 
this competition, combined with the selective action of 
the inorganic factors of the environment, which regulates 
the distribution of living things and the diversity in the 
fauna and flora found in different regions. If this selec- 
tive action could be stopped, the whole fauna and flora 
would soon become almost uniform throughout the 
world. 

The well-known instance of cats and clover, quoted by 
Darwin, well illustrates the extraordinarily complex 
interrelationship between different organisms of most 
diverse structure and most distant affinity. Red clover 
(Trifolium pratense) is almost exclusively fertilised by 
humble-bees, and the abundance of bees in a district is 
much influenced by the number of mice, which destroy 
their nests and eggs. Now since the number of mice 
depends to a great extent on the abundance of cats, these 
animals will affect the distribution of the red clover in the 
neighbourhood. So the goats introduced into St. Helena, 
by eating up the seedling trees, not only destroyed the 
forests, and greatly altered the general flora and fauna of 
the island, but have actually changed the climate itself. 
The notorious tse-tse fly (Glossina morsitans), carrier of 
the deadly disease germ (7rypanosoma Brucet), renders 
certain districts of South Africa uninhabitable for im- 
ported dogs, horses, and cattle; while the distribution 
of man himself has been greatly intluenced by the mos- 
quito Anopheles, and the malaria parasite which it trans- 
mits. But the continuous steady struggle which goes on 
between more closely allied forms is perhaps best seen in 
the case of plants. It can be watched in the forest and 
on the mountain slope, in the desert and in the tropical 


68 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


swamp. The survival of some forms, the extinction of 
others less well adapted, the alternate spread of one 
species and retreat of another as the climatic conditions 
oscillate from dryness to dampness, from heat to cold, 
these are familiar to every botanist. 

We need not.dwell longer on this aspect of the question. 
These and similar facts are not ignored by the most 
sceptical of the opponents of Darwinism; nor is their 
significance denied. But they will say—“Granted that 
the great gaps between the widely divergent forms have 
been produced by the extinction of the intermediate ones, 
granted that the struggle between differing species leads 
to the selection of the best adapted, these well-marked 
‘species’ were already present. Show us,” they will 
ask, “selection between varieties differing but little from 
each other, and between the individual variations them- 
selves.” Instances of the success of mere “varieties” 
are not unknown. Of late years it has been observed that 
dark varieties of various moths have tended to increase 
in northern England, aud may even have superseded the 
original pale forms, as in the case of the peppered moth 
(Amphidasys betularia). Familiar to us all, though per- 
haps rarely understood, are the constant struggles be- 
tween the various races of mankind, which have played 
and still play so large a part in the history of the world ; 
here there is ample material for the study of the selective 
value of all sorts of racial characters. More difficult is it 
to demonstrate the action of selection among individuals, 
and to express the result in statistical form. Only on 
rare eecasions can we directly compare the eliminated 
individuals with the survivers. One good example we 
owe to the American zoologist Bumpus. After a severe 
storm he ¢ollected 136 injured specimens of the common 
sparrow (Passer domesticus); and out of this number 
72 revived, while 64 did not recover. On measuring all 
the birds, and comparing the dead with the survivors, 
it was found that the former on the average were 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 69 


heavier and larger than the latter; but significant also 
was the discovery that the range of variability was dis- 
tinctly smaller among the survivors than the eliminated, 
thus proving that those individuals which departed least 
from the “ideal type” had on the whole the best chance 
of surviving. Weldon has also shown, in the case of a 
terrestrial mollusc, Clausdia laminata, that extreme vari- 
ations tend to be eliminated. Selection of this kind pre- 
serves the mean character of the race. Tower obtained 
the same results on comparing Chrysomelid beetles 
(Leptinotarsa decemlineata) before and after hibernation ; 
the extreme variants died off, and the survivors ap- 
proached nearer to the mean. 

The fact that many commonly occurring mutations, 
such as albinism or variegatéd leaves among plants, fail 
to establish themselves is also clear evidence that con- 
stant elimination of these variations must take place. 

Of all the agents of elimination among human beings 
disease is the most potent in modern times, as Reid and 
others have well shown. Some notion of the death-rate 
and its causes in the human species may be gathered from 
the official government reports. Im the year 1909 there 
died in England and Wales 518,000 individuals (in round 
numbers), of whom 100,000 were infants under one year 
of age. Some 18,000 persons were killed by violence or 
accident, while the remaining 500,000 died of disease. 
Of these tuberculosis carried off 55,000, pneumonia 
36,000, cancer 32,000, measles 12,000, diarrhcea 10,000, 
influenza 9000, whooping-cough 7000, diphtheria 5000, 
scarlet fever 3000, enteric fever 2000, and other diseases 
smaller numbers. This death-rate is selective in so far 
as it affects the fertility and prevents the reproduction 
of susceptible individuals. 

The germs of most of these diseases are so widespread 
that infection cannot be avoided; therefore a constant 
elimination takes place of individuals unable to resist 
their attacks. If the resistance to a particular dangerous 


70 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


disease is “natural,” that is to say depends on characters 
developed in the ordinary environment, then natural 
innate immunity is soon established by selection, and the 
disease is eventually stamped out, only immune indivi- 
duals surviving. But if resistance depends partly or 
entirely on “acquired immunity,” developed only under 
the stimulus of the disease itself, then the disease will 
persist, but become less dangerous as the capacity to 
resist it is increased by selection of the individuals who 
recover most easily. How effectually selection acts is 
realised on observing the rapid and fatal spread of in- 
fectious diseases imported by one race into a region in- 
habited by another race where they were not previously 
prevalent. Unless the invaded race happens by chance 
to be preadapted to resist the new disease, it falls an easy 
victim. Naturally each race is only adapted by selection 
to resist the diseases of its own habitat; town life is as 
fatal to the prairie Indian as winter frost to the tropical 
plant. 

Disease has played a most important part in the evolu- 
tion of the human races. It is not so much by acts of 
violence that the Spanish and other invaders of America 
or the European colonists of Australasia have conquered 
and almost exterminated the native inhabitants of those 
countries, as by the introduction of diseases the natives 
were unable to withstand. Small-pox, measles, and 
tuberculosis have almost cleared the fine indigenous 
races from off the North American continent, severely 
handicapping them in the struggle against their Euro- 
pean rivals. This is merely another instance of the con- 
stant struggle between species or varieties which we have 
discussed above. 

There can be no doubt, then, that the death-rate is 
selective. The next point we have to deal with is the 
part played by selection in the process of evolution. What — 
will be the effect of selection on succeeding generations ; 
or, in other words, what will be the combined effect of 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 71 


elimination and inheritance? It has been far too easily 
assumed by Wallace, and other writers, that the result 
of the continued selection of any character must neces- 
sarily lead to its gradual increase. For instance it was 
supposed that if, out of a number of birds varying in 
' wing-length from 5 to 7 inches, with a mean of 6 inches, 
individuals with a wing-length of 7 inches were chosen 
for breeding, the mean length of the wing of the offspring 
would be raised. And that if for a number of generations 
the parents were always selected from among the birds 
with greatest wing-length, the average wing-length of 
the progeny would be gradually raised from 6 to 7 inches, 
from 7 to 8 inches, and so on indefinitely, so long as the 
selection continued. But Ahis is not necessarily the 
case. * . 

In the first place, if the variations selected are modi- 
fications induced by the environment in individuals 
endowed with the same hereditary factors, no cumulation 
at all will take place, however much the selection may be 
prolonged. Thus the selection of individuals which have 
become immune to a disease in the course of their life- 
time will not increase that immunity, nor free the pro- 
geny from the necessity of becoming immune, unless the 
capacity to acquire immunity itself varies and is selected. 
To take a simpler case—that of the beans mentioned on 
p- 45. Selection of the heaviest bean-seeds from any one 
strain or pure line of uniform hereditary capacity will 
not alter the mean weight of seeds within that strain ; 
the offspring of such a selected bean is no more likely to 
be heavier than is that of any other bean from the same 
strain. But if heavier beans are selected from the whole 
group of strains, differing in their hereditary capacities, 

* Whether the direction of variation is influenced by selection, whether 
the continued selection of a character, and indirectly of its germinal 
factors, encourages their further development, is indeed a most funda- 
mental question. At present, however, it cannot fully be answered, since 


the evidence is quite uncertain. On the whole, current opinion is agai 
the view. 


© 
= 


= {LIBRARY 


72 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


then the mean weight of the offspring will be raised, and 
raised rapidly to the highest possible level—that of the 
strain with the highest mean weight. For since there 
are more heavy bean-seeds among those belonging to the 
strains with the higher mean, they will have a better 
chance of being selected. The offspring of lines with 
lower mean weight will be gradually eliminated, and at 
last only those of the strain with the greatest mean 
weight will remain. Obviously the same result would be 
reached at once if this strain could be distinguished at 
the beginning of the experiment, and alone chosen for pro- 
pagation. Moreover, the effect of selection will come to 
a stop as soon as this highest point is reached ; unless in 
the meantime new changes have arisen in the hereditary 
factors, leading to further possible increase in weight. 
This limitation is a necessary consequence of the sieve- 
like action of selection—it can only select what is already 
there. It must also be understood that the modifica- 
tions due to the environment do not materially alter 
the results of selection, which acts only by the indirect 
choice of particular hereditary constitutions. Cumula- 
tion of results can only take place in so far as new 
mutations occur in the required direction. 

The same conclusions have been reached on statistical 
grounds, and may be expressed as follows. Comparing 
the characters of offspring with those of parents, grand- 
parents, and great-grandparents, it is found that the 
resemblance decresses rapidly; so that the “correla- 
tion” with parent: is about } or ‘5, with grandparents ‘3, 
with great-grandparents ‘2, and so on. The “correla- 
tion” is the ratio expressing the deviation of each genera- 
tion from the mean of the species. This is the “law of 
ancestral inheritance” worked out by Galton and modi- 
fied by Pearson. Pearson has defined it as a rule for 
predicting the average value of a character in the off- 
spring from the value of that character in.the ancestors. 
From this point of view, therefore, the contributions to 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 73 


inheritance from distant ancestors are negligible, and 
selection through very few generations is sufficient to 
yield a practically pure and constant race. 

As was long ago pointed out by Darwin, the method 
and results of natural selection are quite comparable to 
the methods used and the results obtained by man in 
artificial selection. The wonderful diversity of domestic 
races of plants and animals, showing all sorts of new 
developments in size, shape, and colour, in function, 
habits, and mental qualities, is due to the selection of 
individual variations in this or that direction. One 
mutation after another is isolated and bred from, and 
so almost any desired form is obtained. 

_ Now it is often maintained that these domestic varie- 
ties are not of the same value as natural 1aces; that if 
allowed to roam wild, or if selection be relaxed, they re- 
turn to their original condition, degenerate, or regress. 
This conclusion is, however, mostly based on misconcep- 
tions. There is no good reason to believe that domestic 
races are fundamentally different from or inferior to 
natural races, either in mode of formation or in con- 
stancy when formed. If they are generally unable to 
compete with wild races when let loose, it is because they 
have not been selected with this end in view. If they 
appear to degenerate when removed from the care of 
man, it is because they no longer enjoy the exceptionally 
favourable conditions of abundant nutrition, protection 
from enemies, and so forth. Those domestic races which 
fail in the struggle for existence among wild competitors 
are like natural species which, when introduced into a 
new country, fail to establish themselves because the 
conditions are unsuitable. 

But what, it may be asked, is the effect on domestic 
races of mere relaxation or cessation of selection? The 
race will probably tend to regress, that is to say, to 
‘return to the original form from which it was selected. 
There is true regression and false regression. The latter 


74 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


is brought about by the crossing of the new variety with 
the original species with which it may now come into 
contact. This kind of regression by hybridisation, as De 
Vries has shown, is very difficult to prevent with plants 
fertilised by wind or by insects. It leads to the forma- 
tion of intermediate forms ; but the new hereditary con- 
stitution can never be quite suppressed. True regression 
is due to the tendency of the offspring of parents which 
deviate from the mean to return to that mean of the 
race ; it is the inevitable consequence of the interbreeding 
of individuals endowed with unequal inheritance. If the 
race is quite uniform, composed of homozygotes with the 
same hereditary factors, there can naturally be no re- 
gression ; this has been well established by numerous 
and prolonged experiments. But if there is inequality of 
inheritance ever so slight, regression will take place on 
the cessation of selection. It is a universal phenomenon 
common to all impure races, whether artificial or natural. 

In the foregoing chapter it has been shown that 
natural selection acts by eliminating the unfit and so 
leaving the fit to continue the race ; that this selection is 
effective not only between widely divergent forms, but 
also between individuals differing from one another 
by ordinary variations; and lastly, that the process of 
natural selection is strictly analogous to that of artificial 
selection practised by man. But some important points 
still remain to be discussed. 

Are variations continuous or discontinuous is a ques- 
tion which has given rise to much controversy. Con- 
tinuity here means gradation of variation from one ex- 
treme to another, so that, with regard to the measurement 
of a particular character, the individuals of a race could 
be arranged in a series leading gradually from those 
having the character developed to its greatest extent to 
those in which it is least developed. The more gradual 
the transition, the more perfect the continuity, the more 
even would be the curve formed by the ascending series. 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. = 75 


We have already seen (p. 34) that when dealing with 
large numbers of individuals most characters conform to 
this rule and vary continuously. On the other hand, 
discontinuous variation would give rise not toa graduated 
curve but to a series of steps or jumps, from one stage to 
the next above. A tendency towards discontinuity is 
shown in “meristic” variation. Thus, a cell will either 
remain single or divide into two, the antenna of an insect 
may have four, five, or six joints, the number of dorsal 
vertebree in a mammal may vary from twelve to thirteen, 
or from thirteen to fourteen, and so on. But even 
meristic variations need not be discontinuous, and seldom 
is gradation more perfectly shown than in the variation 
of segmental nerves in the plexus supplying the limb of 
a vertebrate (pp. 93, 107). 

The whole subject has been greatly confused by the 
failure to distinguish between continuity in the variation 
of characters and continuity in the changes of hereditary 
factors. Modifications vary continuously, because the 
incidence and quality of the factors of the environment 
are due to chance. Mutations may be discontinuous if 
the changes in the factors giving rise to them are sudden 
and large enough. But the variation of characters due 
to mutation may also be more or less continuous, owing 
for instance to their reactions being modified by other 
factors, as in incomplete dominance (p. 49). Again an 
apparently simple character may become more and more 
pronounced when it is really a complex character, de- 
pending on the co-operation of a number of separate 
factors reinforcing each other—as with the red colour of 
wheat studied by Nilsson-Ehle, which develops only to 
ts full extent when three factors are all present. The 
gradation in the mean weight in the different strains of 
the beans already so often mentioned (pp. 45, 53, 71) is 
perhaps also due to the co-operation of several factors. 
Moreover, it is possible that the factors themselves may 
show grades of strength and development; certainly if 


76 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


the presence and absence theory is correct, the character 
of the heterozygote in the case of the ‘blue Andalusian 
fowl (p. 48) may be explained on the supposition that 
' the single dose of a factor in the heterozygote does not 
produce the same result as the double dose in the homo- 
zygote parent or offspring. 

Here may be mentioned the recent researches of 
Jennings on the Protozoon Difflugia, of Castle on rats, 
and of Morgan on Drosophila, all of which yield incon- 
trovertible evidence of the occurrence of “continuity” in 
mutation—that is to say, of the possibility of isolating 
strains differing from each other by quite small characters 
or in the degree of development of some one character. 
But while Morgan would interpret the gradation as due 
to the cumulative effect of numerons modifying factors 
brought to bear successively on the unit factor of the 
character, Castle maintains that this unit factor itself 
undergoes gradual change. 

Variations, then, may be continuous or discontinuous, 
and there is no hard and fast distinction between the two 
kinds (pp. 57, 93). An interesting question we have now 
to consider is whether large or small variations are the 
more important in evolution. Darwin was uncertain on 
this point, but finally came to the conclusion that natural 
selection dealt chiefly with the smaller. Certainly they 
are the more numerous, and considering how severe may 
be the struggle for existence, it can hardly be doubted 
that they greatly influence the death-rate. The attempts 
which are sometimes made to fix an arbitrary limit to the 
“selection value” of a character are futile ; it all depends 
on the intensity of the struggle at any particular time. 
A character, useless during the greater part of the life of 
an organism, may prove of vital importance on a par- 
ticular occasion. The slightest difference in weight 
between two seeds carried by the wind may decide that 
the one will reach a favourable spot and not the other ; 
the smallest inferiority in powers of resistance may cause 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 77 


one man to perish of a disease while another recovers. 
Nevertheless, selection is of course ready to avail itself of 
large variations or sports, if they are in the right direction. 
However, it has been shown above (p. 68) that extreme 
variations seldom succeed, doubtless because they tend 
to upset that nice adjustment of parts, that harmony of 
function so essential in competition. Indeed, we can 
hardly imagine that the complex adaptations so com- 
monly found, the marvellous cases of protective resem- 
blance between organisms and their surroundings, and 
similar developments, could have arisen otherwise than 
by the accumulation of small differences step by step. 

For it must never be forgotten that variation is not 
itself adaptive. Obviously iff it were adaptive, a species 
would never become extinct, since the right kind of varia- 
tion would then always be presented to meet the demand. 
Variation, on the contrary, is blind, fortuitous, but takes 
place in many directions. Great as may be the number 
of possible directions, it is not infinite. In a sense, 
variation is limited; for all changes in the hereditary 
constitution are, in the end, due to additions to, subtrac- 
tions from, or rearrangements in factors already present. 
Therefore, new developments are greatly influenced by 
the general hereditary constitution of the race, and, we 
may add, some sorts of mutation are liable to occur 
more often than others, and repeatedly in the same or 
even in different groups (albinism, &c.). 

The next point to consider concerns the usefulness 
of characters. It is often urged against the theory 
of natural selection that many characters are useless. 
Now, we have just maintained that variations are not 
adaptive—they may be useful, harmless, or harmful. 
But this does not invalidate the Darwinian doctrine; on 
the contrary, if variations were always useful selection 
could not take place. But if it could be shown that a 
cumulation of harmful or even useless variations had 
occurred, we should have a serious difficulty to deal with. 


78 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


Darwin used to say that a single instance of such useless 
evolution would be fatal to his whole theory: it need 
hardly be added that none has ever been found. 

Natural selection can never be prophetic ; organs can- 
not be developed before they are needed. Certainly 
organisms may on rare occasions by chance, so to speak, 
find themselves ready adapted to meet new conditions ; 
so protoplasm may possess properties which have never 
yet been made use of in the struggle for existence—as, for 
instance, the power of responding to galvanic stimuli. 
But every step in the process of evolution by selection 
must of necessity be useful, must lead to survival. 

Apparent exceptions to this rule may be due to corre- 
lation. Factors of inheritance are able to affect not one 
but several characters, or even the whole organism, so 
that alteration of a character by selection may lead to 
correlated alterations in other parts. Thus changes may 
be brought about not for their own sake, and characters 
useless or even harmful may be developed, so long as the 
advantage gained is not counterbalanced. Correlation 
plays an important part in evolution. It. has been 
elaborately studied mathematically by Pearson and 
others, and has been proved to occur extensively, and 
often in most unexpected directions. 

At the same time, the tendency shown by the detrac- 
tors of Darwinism to assert that this or that character is 
useless, because they cannot find a use for it, is strongly 
. be deprecated. Every day naturalists are discovering 
the functions of the most insignificant-looking organs. 
Little importance can be attached to the statement often 
made that the characters which distinguish nearly allied 
species are of no value to them; in fact no character 
should be accepted as useless until it has been definitely 
proved that it exerts no influence on the death-rate. 
Some few years ago it might have been held—indeed it 
was held—that such organs in man as the thyroid gland, 
the pituitary gland, the suprarenal glands, and others, 


THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. 79 


are useless structures, functionless vestigial remnants. 
They are now known to be of the greatest importance, 
altering the composition of the blood or secreting sub- 
stances essential for the regulation of the processes cf 
metabolism. He would be a rash man indeed who 
would now assert that any part of the human body is 
useless. 

The same may be said of the coloration of organisms, 
and the rash statements so frequently made as to the 
uselessness of the differences in colour which so often 
distinguish species from each other. Doubtless colour 
variations are not adaptive, and the colour differences 
between species are not necessarily adaptive either. 
Yet many possible uses of coloration have been brought 
to light by the labours of Bites, Fritz Miiller, Wallace, 
Poulton, and others, showing that it may often be of the 
greatest importance in the struggle for existence ; as in 
the case of the protective resemblance to surroundings 
enabling an organism to escape from its enemies or to 
approach its prey unnoticed ; of warning colours exhibited 
by animals well able to defend themselves with poisonous 
weapons ; of mimicry where a species gains advantage by 
acquiring a resemblance to some distasteful or dangerous 
form ; of recognition marks or sexual ornaments which 
serve to bring the sexes together. An interesting ex- 
periment on the selection value of colour differences was 
performed by Di Cesnola on the praying mantis (Mantis 
religiosa). This insect occurs in Italy in two varieties, 
a green and a brown, adapted for concealment on green 
or brown surfaces ; and it was found that green speci- 
mens placed in brown surroundings and brown specimens 
placed in green were invariably eaten by their enemies, 
while individuals on a background which they matched 
frequently escaped destruction. 

There was a difficulty much felt by the early advocates 
of natural selection which has been removed now that 
the process of inheritance is better understood. It was 


80 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


thought that a variation which appeared in one or even 
in several individuals of a species would have little chance 
of establishing itself, since it might be reduced and 
finally swamped by constant interbreeding with the more 
numerous individuals of the species not possessing it. 
Such a swamping by intercrossing, however, does not 
occur. We have already seen (p. 52) that factors of in- 
heritance are as a rule transmitted complete ; even when 
the appearance of the character to which it gives rise is 
subject to various inhibiting influences, it is liable at any 
time to reappear in full force, as is seen in: reversion. 
Characters due to factors of inheritance will persist. un- 
less eliminated by variation and selection, as can be 
shown by experiments and by mathematical reasoning. 
The relative scarcity of the mutation at the start does 
not prevent that a number of individuals interbreeding 
at random, some with and others without a certain 
factor, will give rise to a population of impure hetero- 
zygotes and pure homozygotes in which the proportion 
of the three classes will be in equilibrium so soon as the 
square of the number oi heterozygotes equals the number 
of pure “dominants” multiplied by the number of pure 
“recessives.” If this proportion is not already present at 
the beginning it will soon become established, and will 
continue, provided there is no selection to disturb the 
equilibrium. In fact a species of interbreeding indi- 
viduals of unequal hereditary constitution soon reaches 
a state of stability. 


CHAPTER VI 
ISOLATION AND SEXUAL SELECTION 


FR&E intercrossing can only mix hereditary strains, hence 
the necessity for isolation if divergence along various 


ISOLATION AND SEXUAL SELECTION. 81 


lines of adaptation is to take place. .The importance of 
isolation has been variously estimated by different 
authors; but it must not be forgotten that it plays a 
subsidiary part in evolution, and can do nothing with- 
out selection and variation. Selection without isolation 
may give rise to evolution in a straight line ; combined 
with isolation it may lead to divergence into as many 
lines as there are groups of individuals isolated. There 
are several kinds of isolation: geographical, “ physio- 
logical,” and isolation due to the adoption of different 
habits and modes of life. 

Means of dispersal are various. Some organisms are 
borne passively by the wind, as seeds and microscopic 
plants and animals, others by water currents, and still 
others by their own activity“move from place to place. 
In one way or another species are always trying, so to 
speak, to spread over a wider area. Land organisms 
become geographically isolated by the formation of 
barriers such as deserts, or mountain ranges, or by the 
separation of parts of a continent as islands. Marine 
organisms may be divided by the uprising of dry land, 
and the inhabitants of fresh water by the separation of 
river basins. But whatever may be the barrier which 
cuts off more or less completely a number of individuals 
from the main stock, the result is the same—they tend 
to diverge from the parent species. This divergence is 
due to differences in the environment directly or in- 
directly modifying the individuals, to the new fauna and 
flora with which the isolated specimens come into contact 
altering the course of selection, and lastly to the appear- 
ance of new mutations. So many local races or species 
become differentiated ; and when a number of closely 
allied forms occupy neighbouring regions, they are more 
unlike, generally speaking, the further they have strayed 
from the original centre of distribution. The more com- 
plete and the older the barrier the greater will be the 


divergence. Thus the marine and littoral fauna on the 
(2,031) 


82 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


opposite coasts of the isthmus of Panama differ con- 
siderably, but differ far less than does the fauna of the 
Mediterranean from that of the Red Sea, these seas 
having been separated for a much longer time. In the 
Sandwich Islands there are some 300 species of the genus 
Achatinella, almost every valley having its own peculiar 
form of this mollusc. A similar variety of structure has 
been described by Sarasin among the land molluscs of 
the island of Celebes, where species become subdivided 
into an astonishing number of local races still united by 
transitional forms. Islands afford excellent illustrations 
of divergence through isolation. While their fauna and 
flora bear a general resemblance to those of the nearest 
mainland, each island or archipelago usually acquires a 
remarkable number of peculiar forms. For instance. 
almost everyone of the West Indian islands has its repre- 
sentative species of the golden oriole. The Galapagos 
archipelago has its own reptiles, insects, and land mol- 
luscs; out of some thirty species of land birds about 
twenty-eight are peculiar: while each one of these 
islands has developed its own race of the gigantic land 
tortoise. 

Another kind of isolation is that brought about by 
parasitism. Since every parasite tends to restrict itself 
to one particular kind of host, being often actually trans- 
mitted from one individual to another, a parasitic species 
becomes split up into as many divergent races as there 
are varieties of host, until finally each host may acquire 
its own peculiar species of parasite. A somewhat similar 
subdivision and specialisation takes place in plants fer- 
tilised by insects. The flowers tend to become special- 
ised in structure and colour to attract particular kinds 
of insects, while the insects undergo a corresponding 
specialisation in order to derive nourishment from the 
flowers. 

Physiological isolation may result from incompati- 
bility of habits or temperament, or from sterility. 


ISOLATION AND SEXUAL SELECTION. 83. 


Closely allied rival forms often meet or overlap in some 
region, yet interbreed little, or not at all, although quite 
capable of forming a fertile union and of producing 
fertile offspring. A familiar instance is that of the 
negroes and whites in America. Sterility in one form or 
another is the most important physiological barrier, and 
may be due to many different causes. For instance, 
sterility may result from variation in the structure of 
the copulatory organs, as in numberless kinds of insects ; 
or merely in their size or shape. Intercrossing may also 
be prevented if sexual maturity is reached at different 
times of the year ; and self-fertilisation is made impossible 
for most hermaphrodites by the spermatozoa developing 
either before or after the ova in the same individual. 
Lastly, isolation may result*from some variation in the 
germ-cells themselves, causing fertilisation to be imper- 
fect or sterile even if it take place; this may be called 
true sterility. Further, the zygotes when formed may 
fail to develop normally, or even if viable the hybrid 
offspring may themselves be sterile. This form of ste- 
rility is common among plants and animals; the mule- 
produced from a cross between the horse and the donkey 
is the most familiar instance. In these various ways, 
then, divergences inevitably arise among groups of 
organisms originally alike, and evolution in its course 
moves along ever branching paths. 

If a higher organism is to succeed in the struggle for 
existence it must reproduce itself sexually ; hence the 
importance in evolution of the various adaptations for 
securing the fertile union of the sexes. The differences. 
between the two sexes, other than those of the repro- 
ductive organs themselves, are known as secondary sexual 
characters. Many are of such a kind as to enable them 
to find and recognise each other, and to accomplish the 
act of copulation. To this class belong the diverse 
organs developed in all sorts of animals for grasping the 
female, the call notes of many insects, birds, and mammals, 


84 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


and the strong scents given off by female hawk-moths, 
male musk-deer and stags, and other animals at the time 
of maturity. Conspicuous sexual differences are often 
produced by the development im one sex of special organs 
to receive stimuli from the other, as for instance in the 
Crustacea and Insecta, where the olfactory organs, the 
antenne, may be greatly enlarged and modified in the 
males. 

But there are many other secondary sexual characters 
the use of which is by no means so obvious—such as the 
beautiful patterns and colours developed in male butter- 
flies and other insects, the marvellous wealth of orna- 
mental colours and plumage in birds, and offensive 
weapons like the antlers of deer—and it is one of Dar- 
win’s greatest triumphs to have g*’ea us in the theory 
of sexual selection a rational expianation of the evolu- 
tion of these apparently useless characters. No hard 
and fast line can be drawn between natural and sexual 
selection. Sexual selection may be considered as sub- 
ordinate to natural selection, as a special kind of natural 
selection taking place within the limits of an interbreed- 
ing set of animals or “species.” It is due to the com- 
petition between individuals of one sex for the possession 
of the other. Almost always it is the males which com- 
pete for the females, either because they are more numer- 
ous or because they are polygamous. This kind of selec- 
tion takes place only among highly organised animals, 
and is almost entirely restricted to the vertebrates and 
arthropods (insects and spiders) It has been aptly 
called the struggle for wife as opposed to the struggle for 
life ; but failure means, in the end, extinction in the one 
case as in the other. 

Darwin has convincingly shown how severe is the com- 
petition between the rival males, how universal is the 
law of battle, leaving the most agile the strongest and 
the best-armed in possession of the field. The general 
superiority of the male sex in strength, pugnacity, and 


ISOLATION AND SEXUAL SELECTION. 85 


fighting weapons, such as the large canine teeth of male 
mammals and the antlers of stags, is accounted for by 
the survival of variations leading to victory in the fierce 
struggles which take place between the males at the 
breeding season. The correctness of this view can hardly 
be doubted; but there is great divergence of opinion 
when the principle of sexual selection is applied to the 
more purely ornamental secondary sexual characters. 
These characters are very commonly developed among 
the higher animals, and one may mention as examples 
the mane of the lion and bison, the ornamental patches 
of colour and hair in monkeys, the beard in man; the 
brilliant wattles and plumage in numberless birds, such 
as the gorgeous feathers of pheasants, peacocks, birds of 
paradise, and humming birds; the ornamental colours 
in many fish, butterflies and spiders, the horn-like pro- 
cesses of beetles, the attractive scents of butterflies, the 
vocal sounds emitted by insects, frogs, and mammals, 
and the beautiful song of birds. Darwin pointed out 
that these brilliant and striking characters appeal to 
the senses of the female, and are deliberately displayed 
to her at the breeding season. Courtship with these 
animals is often a lengthy and elaborate business, during 
which the male may perform a regular dance and strike 
attitudes to display himself to the best advantage. The 
more attractive male will thus secure his mate more 
rapidly and certainly than the less happily endowed, or, 
in the case of polygamous species, will be followed by a 
greater number of females. Even if the less successful 
males eventually manage to pair, they will not have 
such good or so many chances of leaving offspring. 
A small percentage of. advantage in this respect is 
sufficient to bring about a selective result. Now it 
is characteristic of such structures and colours that 
they develop only in one sex and generally only at ma- 
turity ; frequently, as in birds, they are periodically 
renewed at each breeding season. Moreover, they 


86 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


‘appear only on those parts which are displayed’ in 
courtship. 

Much scepticism has been shown concerning the efii- 
cacy of sexual selection as a factor in evolution, chiefly 
on the ground that the theory seems to presume an 
esthetic taste and power of choice in the female. But 
this criticism is due, at all events to a great extent, toa 
misunderstanding of the metaphorical language in which 
it is convenient, if not necessary, to describe such facts. 
Strictly speaking, “choice” and “taste” are but words 
to express the fact that the female is more stimulated by 
one kind of form, colour, scent or sound than by another. 
In physiological language it is all a matter of stimulus 
and response ; those males will succeed best which most 
effectually stimulate the females. Doubtless in many 
cases, here as elsewhere, the facts are but incompletely 
known ; but in others the evidence is convincing enough. 
We will here mention only one instance, that of the 
spiders of the family Attide, so thoroughly studied by 
Mr, and Mrs. Peckham. These very competent observers 
show clearly, that when the sexes are differentiated the 
males are the more brilliantly coloured ; that the young 
male resembles the adult female, and that it is the male 
that has departed from the ordinary ancestral colouring ; 
that the male colours are visible and displayed during 
courtship ; that the females pay attention to them and 
exercise a “choice”; and lastly, that the more brilliant 
males may be selected again and again. Moreover, it 
must be remembered that sexual selection is known to 
occur in the pairing of the human species, and that its 
selective value has been statistically estimated. 

Wallace has pointed out that natural selection must 
often compel the female to keep to a more modest and 
protective type of coloration than the male; for, until 
she has laid her eggs or reared her young, a female may 
be more essential for the propagation of the race than a 
particular male; and there can be no doubt that pro- 


PHYLOGENY AND CLASSIFICATION. 87 


tective coloration or structure, mimiery, polymorphism, 
and other such factors, greatly complicate the problem 
of the evolution of secondary sexual characters. 


CHAPTER VII 
PHYLOGENY AND CLASSIFICATION 


Ir is the task of the anatomist and systematist to study 
and compare the structure of adult organisms (Compara- 
tive Anatomy or Morphology), and also their develop- 
ment (Embryology), in order to make out their affinities, 
to discover the lines of descent which connect the various 
diverging branches of the genealogical tree. These 
branches are called Phyla, and Phylogeny is the name 
given to the study of the pedigrees of organisms, the 
tracing out of their blood-relationships. A true natural 
classification is based on phylogeny. Much valuable 
evidence for this science can be derived from Palon- 
tology, the study of fossil extinct animals and plants, 
which may reveal the actual ancestral forms or their 
near relatives ; but a great deal can be gathered also from 
a knowledge of the structure and development of the 
living. 

Since forms which differ widely in the adult condition 
often resemble each other much more closely in the 
young or embryonic stages, by observing their develop- 
ment affinities can sometimes be discovered which would 
not otherwise be suspected, or at all events would be very 
doubtful. Familiar instances are those of the Tunicates 
and Cirripedes. The former are the Sea Squirts, seden- 
tary animals for the most part, which have undergone 
degeneration owing to their peculiar mode of life. The 
adult lives fixed to the sea bottom, and is of very simple 
structure, showing little resemblance to an ordinary 


88 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


vertebrate, yet the young free-swimming larva has all 
the characteristics of the Vertebrate phylum, with /its 
dorsal central nervous system, gill-slits, axial skeletal 
rod or notochord, and tail. The cirripedes or barnacles 
likewise have taken to a fixed habit in adult life, and have 
lost almost all resemblance to the Crustacea from which 
they have been derived, as is shown by the larval stages 
typically crustacean. Other common instances of de- 
generation are afforded by parasites. Often they be- 
come simplified beyond recognition, but betray their true 
affinities in their development. Many parasitic crustacea 
of the order Copepoda lose practically all trace in the 
adult condition of the characteristic appendages used in 
the normal free-living forms for locomotion or for seizing 
and cutting up their food. Indeed, parasitic animals, 
able as they are to absorb the nourishment directly from 
their host, generally tend to lose not only organs of loco- 
motion and of special sense, but even the alimentary 
canal, and spend all their energies in producing enormous 
numbers of young to infect new hosts. The loss of the 
organs of flight in flightless birds and insects, and of the 
eyes in animals living in caves or the dark depths of the 
ocean is also due to degeneration. 

Degeneration, in fact, is a widespread phenomenon 
among animals and plants, and leads to the loss of 
any special structures mental or bodily which the organ- 
ism no longer needs in the particular environment for 
which it has become adapted. It is a return from a com- 
plex to a simpler organisation ; but not to a truly primi- 
tive or ancestral condition, for the path of retrogression 
is generally very different from that followed by the 
original progressive evolution. Now it is one of the great 
merits of the doctrine of evolution by natural selection, 
that it accounts for this simplification as easily as for the 
development of complexity. For both progressive and 
retrogressive mutations occur. Variation takes place 
both in the + and inthe — direction, and selection of the 


PHYLOGENY AND CLASSIFICATION. 89 


one may be as advantageous as selection of the other. 
Which will be chosen depends on the needs of the organism 
at the time. On the other hand, it is very difficult to see 
how any theory of evolution based on some supposed 
internal perfecting force could possibly be reconciled 
with these facts. 

Strewn along the path of evolutionary change are thus 
left derelict organs once of vital importance, but now no 
longer of use, or at all events of less consequence in the 
struggle for existence, owing to some change in habit 
and environment. Such organs are known as vestigial ; 
and unless they are turned to some new purpose, that is 
to say, unless they vary in such a way as to become 
adapted to fulfil some new function, they are apt to dis- 
appear. The exact process“of disappearance is difficult 
to describe, is in fact not thoroughly understood. If an 
organ thrown out of work is an actual burden on the 
organism, it will tend to become eliminated by selection 
of retrogressive variations, and will also be apt to develop 
incompletely in the individual. owing to disuse. But 
if merely useless, it may remain indefinitely as a vestigial 
structure. Such, for instance, are the vestigial hind 
limbs in the dugong and in whales, and the teeth in em- 
bryo baleen whales, the much reduced wing in flightless 
birds like the emu or the apteryx, or the extinct moas of 
New Zealand. It would be rash, however, to take it for 
granted that even in these cases the vestiges are alto- 
gether without function (p. 79). 

But it is far more common for the apparent disappear- 
ance of an organ to be due to its alteration and adapta- 
tion to some new function. And this brings us to another 
objection often urged against Darwinian doctrines. If 
natural selection cannot be prophetic (p. 78), if organs 
cannot develop before they are called into use, how can 
one account for the initial stages in their development ? 
Of what use can a complex organ be before it is com- 
pleted? But this objection loses its force when it is 


90 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


remembered that organs rarely if ever can be said to 
“begin.” Entirely new functions and entirely new 
organs are not suddenly developed. All are evolved by 
the gradual transformation of, addition to, or subtrac- 
tion from something already there. The wing of a bird, 
unique as it is, has had nosudden beginning—it has been 
gradually transformed from the fore-limb of the reptile. 
The extinct Archeopteryx from the Jurassic strata has a 
modified limb in a beautifully intermediate state. The 
one-toed hoof of the horse is not a new organ; it is derived 
from an ordinary five-toed foot by the gradual loss of the 
lateral digits. Almost every stage of its history can be 
traced in the fossils. What more complex or useful 
organ than the human eye? Yet it is merely an instance 
of the extreme specialisation of the property of response 
to light generally distributed over the surface of the body 
in the lowest forms. In the evolution of an organ by 
selection every stage must be useful, and it is often diffi- 
cult to picture the intermediate conditions; but we 
must not jump to the conclusion that they could not have 
existed. The heart of the amphibian has one ventricle, 
in which the venous and arterial blood become more or 
less mixed ; that of the bird has the ventricle completely 
subdivided into two chambers, so that the venous is kept 
quite separate from the pure arterial blood. Now if 
reptiles were unknown, we could well imagine an op- 
ponent of the theory of natural selection stating dog- 
matically that the intermediate steps in the formation 
of the dividing septum could not have been useful, and 
therefore could not have been selected. To be effective 
at all, he would say, the septum must be complete from 
the beginning ; if the venous is to be separated from the 
arterial blood an intermediate stage would be of no use. 
Such arguments are constantly heard. Fortunately, 
in this case, we can point to the reptilia, where these 
very intermediate steps occur, and the incomplete 
septum can be shown actually at work. 


— 


PHYLOGENY AND CLASSIFICATION. 91. 


As a rule, evolution leads to specialisation and differ- 
entiation along the ever diverging and forking branches 
of the phylogenetic tree. Usually the more diverse 
organisms become the more successful they are in the 
struggle for existence, since they interfere less with each 
other owing to their adoption of different modes of life 
and different feeding habits. On a given plot of ground 
more individual plants can live if they belong to several 


Fie. 2.—Convergent evolution. Salamandra (1), 2 normal Urodele Am- 
phibian ; and Siphonops (2), a legless Amphibian ; Agama (4), a nor- 
mal Lacertilian; and Amphisbena (5), a legless Lacertilian. (2) 
and (5) being adapted to a burrowing life have come to resemble 
the Earth-worm (3) and each other. 


species adapted in different ways, than if they belong to 
one species only. But occasionally evolution leads to 
convergence in function and structure. Organisms and 
their parts may then come to resemble each other, an- 
alogies are developed. Thus a burrowing snake like 
Typhlops, a burrowing lizard like Amphisbzena, or 
amphibian like Siphonops, acquire a resemblance to an 
earthworm (Fig. 2); or again, among the Mammalia, the 
“fiying ” squirrel, Pteromys, and the “flying” phalanger, 


92 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


Petaurus, have become remarkably alike. Very striking 
also may be the analogous resemblance between two 
organs of different origin, but fulfilling the same definite 
function, as the eyes of Polychsete worms, of Molluses, 
and of Vertebrates. Mimicry and protective resemblance 
also are special examples of convergence. Yet however 
close the resemblance may be, it is generally essentially 
superficial, and the separate origin of two structures is 
usually betrayed not only by fundamental differences, 
but also by innumerable details. Just as the expert can 
often detect a forged antiquity by careful inspection, so 
the comparative anatomist distinguishes analogies from 
true homologies. It is worth insisting upon this subject, 
because the French philosopher Bergson has recently, we 
think, greatly exaggerated the extent and somewhat mis- 
represented the significance of convergence. 

Coming now to classification, it is the sorting out of 
organisms into groups according to their natural affini- 
ties. Individuals are grouped into species, species into 
genera, these again into families, orders, classes, and 
phyla, divisions of increasing size and importance. 
Before the doctrine of evolution was accepted, it was 
thought that these groups had definite limits based on 
some separately created and fixed unit. At one time it 
was supposed that the comparatively large genus was the 
unit of creation, the species and varieties within it be- 
ing merely fluctuations caused by external influences. 
Linnzus maintained that the smaller group, the species, 
is the originally created unit, and succeeded in establish- 
ing his views so firmly that they grew into a dogma from 
which the systematist even of the present day has not 
entirely freed himself. But the consistent evolutionist 
recognises that so-called “species” are merely closely 
allied individuals descended from a common ancestor, 
which normally interbreed, and are sufficiently alike to 
be conveniently called by the same name. All sorts 
of vain attempts have been made to draw up stricter 


PHYLOGENY AND CLASSIFICATION. 93 


definitions of a true species. Mere likeness counts for 
little: males and females may often differ very consider- 
ably from each other, and in polymorphic forms the off- 
spring of the same parents may be of several different 
types. Sterility has often been held to form a definite 
barrier distinguishing true species from mere varieties 
(p. 83); but there are all degrees of fertility, and crosses 
between forms which no systematist would hesitate to 
call species often yield offspring. Sterility is a character 
variable like any other ; it occurs even between members 
of undoubtedly the same species, as we know in the case 
of our own. 

It is true that De Vries has recently tried to define 
“elementary species” as forms produced with a new 
progressive mutation, due to the acquisition of some new 
factor. Such forms, if they really occur suddenly, could 
certainly be considered as definite discontinuous steps in 
evolution. Especially among plants there are many 
widely distributed “species” containing a large number 
of local races or subspecies, each breeding true and ap- 
parently differing from the others by one or perhaps a 
few “unit characters.” Of the whitlow-grass (Draba 
verna) some two hundred constant races have been dis- 
tinguished by Jordan; and similar subdivisions of the 
species of Viola, Helianthemum, &c., are known. But the 
evidence as to the sudden origin of the mutations is 
weak ; and, at all events, it is by no means yet established 
that new factors may not appear gradually in increasing 
intensity, so that discontinuity becomes negligible, and 
the new characters develop in steps small enough to 
satisfy the most exacting selectionist (p. 76). The diver- 
sity of variation and the smallness of the steps in muta- 
tion are well illustrated in the case of the hawkweed 
(Hieractum) and the dandelion (Taraxacum), which re- 
produce parthenogenetically ; as in the Bacteria, there 
may be differentiated as many “pure lines” as there are 
parents, and a bewildering number of races results, 


94 EVOLUTION OF LIVING GRGANISMS. 


each distinguished by some small constant variation in 
character. Indeed, it is the universal experience of 
naturalists engaged in the classification of quite modern 
closely allied “species,” that the great difficulty of the 
work is due to the fact that it is usually scarcely possible 
to find any character at all sufficiently conspicuous and 
constant to distinguish them from each other. Sudden 


Species Species 


oN Ve Species 


Genus 


Pe 


Order 
Fic. 3.—Diagram to illustrate the principles of classification. 


mutations and sharp distinctions would be welcomed by 
all systematists. 

The only “fixed points” in a phylogenetic system of 
classification are the points of bifurcation, where one 
branch diverges from another (Fig. 3). It is here that 
our divisions should be made; and our generic, family, 
and ordinal distinctions naturally come at each fork 
farther and farther down the stem of the phylogenetic 
tree. The phylogeny of organisms, however, is but 
incompletely known ; and often the actual point of diver- 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 95 


gence or origin of a group may be but vaguely inferred, 
so we have to compromise and adopt divisions which only 
indicate progressive grades of structure. 

There is one more consideration to be borne in mind 
when dealing with species. The living species around us 
represent the extreme tips of the branches of the phylo- 
genetic tree, which have succeeded in the struggle for 
existence. If their ancestors are extinct these living 
twigs become isolated from each other, and so real limits 
become established, which of course would disappear if 
the complete series of extinct forms were discovered. It 
is the inevitable result of evolution by the elimination 
of the less well-adapted that ever widening gaps come 
to separate the diverging living representatives of the 
various branches derived from a common stem. 


CHAPTER VIII 
THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE 


EVOLUTION is too often represented as a history of success 
and progress; it is also one of extinction and failure. 
Authors, seeming to forget that for one line of develop- 
ment that succeeds there are a hundred that fail, are fond 
of invoking some mysterious guiding principle, some in- 
ternal perfecting agency—an élan vital, or what not—to 
account for evolution; but there would appear to be 
little scope for such mysterious forces in a world where 
the majority of individuals are crushed out, where most 
lines of development fail hopelessly to establish them- 
selves. What guiding principle there may be behind the 
whole of creation is a subject outside the scope of Natural 
Science, and on which it can express no opinion. It 
cannot even prophesy whether man or the bacillus will 
eventually triumph in the struggle for existence ; indeed, 


96 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


both would seem to be doomed to destruction in the end 
by an unfavourable environment when this earth becomes 
too hot or too cold to support life. In the meantime, it 
is the great merit of the Darwinian principles of evolu- 
tion that they account for the failures as well as for 
the successes. The elimination of the unfit, leaving the 
better adapted in possession, is a necessary part of the 
process. 

The living organisms of to-day show us the types 
which have succeeded ; for the failures we must appeal 
to the record of the past as revealed by a study of fossil 
remains. This record, in spite of its incompleteness, 
has much to teach. Every theory of evolution must be 
tested by the results of paleontology ; no conclusion can 
be accepted which is inconsistent with them. 

In the first place, the conviction derived from a study 
of living forms is confirmed, that evolution does not pro- 
ceed along continuous straight lines, but, on the contrary, 
along a multitude of diverging branches. Just as indi- 
viduals are found to vary in all directions compatible 
with their structure and composition, so groups become 
differentiated in various directions, each adapted to a 
particular mode of life. Having reached a certain favour- 
able combination of characters, they start on this new 
plane of structure to diverge, according to the principle 
of adaptive radiation, as it has been called by Osborn, 
many instances of which are found in the history of the 
land vertebrates. 

Derived from some fish-like aquatic ancestor in 
Devonian or pre-Devonian times, the land vertebrates 
appear in Carboniferous strata as clumsily-built Am- 
phibia with four walking limbs. Like their modern 
representatives, they spent their early life in water, 
breathing by means of gills, and made use of lungs for 
respiration in adult life on land. These primitive 
amphibia soon diverged in various directions. Some 
acquired a large size and formidable dentition, like the 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 97 


Labyrinthodonts ; others remained small, and were prob- 
ably harmless herbivores; some became elongated, lost 
their limbs, and were adapted to an eel- or snake-like 
mode of progression (Aistopoda); while others (Bran- 
chiosauria), losing the original scaly covering of the fish- 
like ancestor, gave rise to the modern groups (the frogs 
and toads, or Anura, and the salamanders and newts, 
or Urodela). These latter are all specialised forms, the 
existing Urodela being only the degenerate remnants of 
a once flourishing class which have become more or less 
completely readapted to an aquatic life. In fact, the 
Anura are the only order which has succeeded and ex- 
panded in recent times. 

The Amphibian was the dominant type in Carbonif- 
erous times; it now occupies a very subordinate place. 
But from some unspecialised branch of it arose the more 
thoroughly terrestrial Reptilia towards the end of the 
Carboniferous or beginning of the Permian epoch. The 
class Reptilia reached a higher grade of structure, and 
soon almost completely superseded the Amphibia on 
dry land. So successful were the reptiles that already in 
Permian and Triassic times they had spread over the 
whole earth, becoming adapted in various directions to 
all sorts of life (Fig. 4). The earliest reptiles known so 
closely resemble the primitive Amphibia that it is difficult 
to say where one class begins and the other ends; but 
these undifferentiated reptiles soon gave way to more 
specialised successors. The Theromorpha gave rise to 
remarkable forms: some with large fiat grinding teeth 
(Placodontia) ; others active, vigorous creatures with a 
formidable carnivorous dentition (Therocephalia and 
Therodontia) ; while the highly-specialised Dicynodontia 
retained only two huge tusks. None of these specialised 
reptiles survived beyond the Trias. Other lines of dif- 
ferentiation lead toward a return to aquatic life. 
Plesiosaurs and Ichthyosaurs quite independently took 


to marine life, and their limbs became transformed into 
(2,081) 7 


"QT “(aT AJoUpOIN} J) IMVsO1}q 6 PT “TMBSOTSe[ * ST ‘rmesoAyyyoyT { (suanesop[sy,) ZL ‘ydiomouoyys gt ? SULIOs 
au, ‘(WOpoueNS[ snosoalqsoy) TI ‘(SULOY oATsuesop YIVA sdozwssdi1y, sNOIOATGIOY) OT ‘(SNOOpoydIq snorOATqiey) 6 
(snamesoyeiag snoroatureo) g—sinesoulg ‘1 ‘epypooorg ¢(as}0q10, juvyderq) 9 ‘UvIMOTEYyQ ‘f(exsug puoWIq) g 
‘asIpIydg {(UIYgG peoj-e011[}) F ‘SQUAT, TVIST4sSea YIIA UvITAONT * g ‘YdromorOYy, ‘(uopousydg) Z ‘uejsydesoyousyy 
‘$] ‘weLMeseforeg OATpUNg ‘ajT] JO SOpOUL SNOLIVA 0} UOLVe}epe UT BITdoY ss¥IQ 944 UL WOPJNOAD yuEesIOAIq—'"p “Hy 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 99 


swimming-paddles. Neither group persisted beyond the 
Cretaceous epoch. Among the most interesting extinct 
reptiles are the Dinosauria. First appearing in the Tri- 
assic, they flourished in the Jurassic and Cretaceous, but 
became extinct before the beginning of the Eocene epoch, 
Often of gigantic size—as for instance Cetiosaurus and 
Diplodocus—these remarkable animals were the lords of 
the earth in later Mesozoic times. Some were adapted 
to a herbivorous vegetable diet, like the huge Iguano- 
don; while others were aggressive carnivores, like 
Ceratosaurus and Megalosaurus. But in spite of every 
effort, so to speak, to succeed in all possible directions, 
in spite of elaborate adaptations, terrible weapons, 
formidable defensive bony plates, horns, and spines, 
these splendid Dinosaurs all filed in the struggle for 
existence by the end of the Cretaceous epoch (Figs. 4 
and 5). 

Some se rtadttatives of the large order Crocodilia still 
persist in the tropics; but the Rhynchocephalia survive 
at the present day only in the single species Sphenodon 
punctatum, preserved by special legislation on certain 
small islands off the coast of New Zealand. The Ptero- 
sauria, admirably specialised for flight as they appear to 
have been, had but a short success in later Mesozoic 
times. On the other hand, the Chelonia (tortoises and 
turtles), modestly taking refuge in their bony shell, are 
fairly flourishing in warm countries even at the present 
day. But of the vast array of reptilian forms the 
Lacertilia (lizards) and Ophidia (snakes) are the only 
two orders which have really increased and spread in 
recent times. A few other orders linger on in reduced 
numbers ; the majority have failed altogether (Figs. 4 
and 5). 

Bat although the reptilian type, once so successful and 
widespread, has failed so signally in the struggle for 
existence, it has given rise to other types which have 
replaced it. The birds are doubtless descended from 


“eryrydony 
oy} Ul UOT}OUTXe pu ‘[eATAIns ‘UOTINIJOA JuoZI0A Ip ‘AudZopAY oy} Suyeaysniyy wesserq—'g ‘ory 


‘ ‘ 


‘ 

‘ 

‘ ‘ 
iid eee,“ 


snousasiInos¥YD 


‘ 

{ 

! 

' 

' 

Ll 

i \ 

' 

\ ivy 2 viuNvsSoudIN 


ail L L ex - 
‘ sy 
3 ~ aS { \ *< 
ag =! \ NWIWYad 
4 
an. Pi L if l a 
’ ' . 
Pa J vf / ' is 
, ' Rod ek 
4 j ' oso es 
WHIYOWONIHL |” ' Wes 
r ‘ . ' 
” A ron rr emerrs mae 
* th \ ‘. oi 
“ ake \ » ~ 
7 a ie’ \ 
‘ / N 
‘ ‘ ‘ “. 
Pil \ ‘ dissvunr 
ae : x ‘ 
/ 
; / / rT \ 
{ wiunwsoisaid \ vIuNvsouaid 
/ VINNWSOAMLHO! VHddOW ’ 
‘ : - snogzovsayud 
/ ONOWLAd : viNNvsoNia 
‘ ‘ 
¢ 
/ H 
“ T 
’ ' 
/ 
; (gua0u0 
d ONTAIAUNS) 
sauie 1N39034 
epee VINO13HD vITILYaOWT 
SIVAN WYN wioneo vit1go0204uD 


VITWHAJDOHINAHY 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 101 


some primitive reptile allied to the Crocodilia and Dino- 
sauria. The avian branch has undergone comparatively 
little pruning. Quickly supplanting the Pterosauria 
after the Jurassic epoch, they radiated along all sorts of 
adaptive lines, most of which survive to the present day. 
The beautifully adapted organisation of birds, with warm 
blood, efficient lungs, sharp senses, quick movements, 
and light feathers, has secured them a supremacy in the 
air which has hardly been challenged even by the 
mammals. 

The Mammalia, that class of vertebrates to which we 
ourselves belong, arose earlier than the birds, probably 
from some primitive reptilian stock in Permian times. 
Indeed, the Theromorph reptiles of the Trias so nearly 
approach the mammalian typé of structure in the char- 
acter of the skull, palate, lower jaw, and other important 
points, that they are now generally held to have been, 
if not the ancestors themselves, at all events closely 
allied to them. Quite independently of birds, and on 
different lines of specialisation, the Mammalia have 
acquired a four-chambered heart, completely separating 
the arterial blood from the venous, and a self-regulating 
mechanism, keeping the blood at a constant high tem- 
perature, independent of that of the surrounding environ- 
ment (p. 41). Of very adaptive build, the mammals 
soon diverged from the primitive ancestral egg-laying 
type now almost extinct, but still preserved in the 
archaic Monotremes living in Australia, the famous 
Ornithorhynchus, and Echidna. Adopting the advan- 
tageous method of nourishing their young during early 
_ life in the mother’s womb, the placental mammals spread 
rapidly over the earth, ousting the lower reptilian type 
of organisation, and diverging in various adaptive direc- 
tions, they became the dominant group in Eocene times 
(Fig. 6). The mammals have, however, suffered severely 
in the struggle. Large groups have vanished altogether, 
while others are on the verge of extinction. The Mar- 


~ auqURT) 
© cooatit fog toquy 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 108 


supials, once widely distributed, remain only in Aus- 
tralia, where they have escaped from competition with 
the more advanced Placentalia, and as scattered genera 
in America. The Dugong and Manatee are now the 
only representatives of the order Sirenia; while the 
Edentata, including the gigantic ground Sloths (Mega- 
sherium) and Glyptodonts, once all-powerful in South 
America, are reduced nowadays to a few highly-special- 
ised tree-sloths and armadillos (Fig. 6). 

Most instructive is the history of the large order 
Ungulata, which includes all the hoofed herbivorous 
mammals. Starting in Eocene times from primitive 
forms about the size of a fox, with complete unspecialised 
dentition and five-toed feet, known as the Condylarthra, 
and long ago extinct, the Ungulates branched out into 
a number of sub-orders (Fig. 7). The Amblypoda de- 
veloped into huge creatures, like Dinoceras, with large 
tusks and four horns on the skull, but did not survive 
beyond the Eocene age. A somewhat similar but quite 
distinct group of massively-built herbivores, the Titano- 
theria, lasted only into the Miocene, while the bighly- 
specialised and aberrant sub-order Ancylopoda occurs 
up to the Pliocene epoch. Two South American groups, 
the formidable rhinoceros-like Toxodontia and the more 
horse-like Litopterna, have left no descendants. The 
Hyracoidea survive at the present day only in the little 
coney, Hyrax, and a closely-allied genus; and of the 
Proboscidea, including mastodons, mammoths, and 
elephants, a large group once widely distributed over 
both the Old and the New World, there persists but one 
species in Asia and one in Africa. Even the large sub. 
order Perissodactyla (the odd-toed Ungulates), although 
still represented by a few rhinoceroses, tapirs, horses, 
and asses, is by no means as widespread or successful as 
it once was. The even-toed Artiodactyla are at present 
the most flourishing group, with a large number of genera 
and species of deer, antelopes, sheep, and oxen. But 


> ys ws y™ 


dnois posite 


VWEHIUMNAONOD 


a 


— 
(ae 
a f 
“y 


‘qsud orf} UT UCT PoINGIAASIP ATEpIA pu snoroUINU ss2] Av] ov Lep quosaad 
ay} 4B BATAINS YOTYAr osoy} JO Ysou puv “yourZxe ogInb arv seyouvaq jo Jequinu esie, WY “aus00q O44 UT (wAYyqav[ApUO;) 
a8 BN Oreyote UB WO’ UOTYVIpeA oAIdepy soy} Sutmoys vyv[nSuy oyy jo AusSojAyg ayy Jo wesviq—") ‘sy 


’ | 
f ‘\, a 
» & 
say, 9nN3503 
oe Ee 
¥ ¢s ‘ oa 
we \ 
rs vaodA1E WY \ 
, 
’ 
J winaHe Sg \ 
! -1ONISUY VINIHLONAd { 
‘ Ht 3N3900/90 
H ‘ i 
' i 
% / r Sek | ys 
' 
\ vaodO1AINY ' 
‘ WINIHAON Wit 
2N3D0IW 
VILNOGOKOL 
vuzido.y | " anz30IW 
vinoao3ue \ 
‘ 
BVOIRVWLOd Oddi (sasous 
@voiAoe avaIAuse ONIAIAUNS) 
aVOINSVOOTILNY 
VIDIOOVHAH svaridave avaing 4N9934N 
vaal oy va0lOuldy. veoos 
ESTEEOR ONS nna avainoa s yNIINOVES Caine 
Scesseeanaecb memes 
VIGIOLONIZONINY VWOOdO TAL 


wadiOddiv 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 105 


the pig-like forms, or Suina, have not been very suc- 
cessful; the hippopotamus is nearing extinction, the 
Tylopoda (camels) are but the isolated relics of a not 
very flourishing division, and many allied families have 
failed altogether. Thus we see that the existing families 
of Ungulates are but the scattered remnants of a far 
larger number of groups which flourished more or less 
successfully in the past (Fig. 7). And the same may be 
said of the history of all organisms, whether vertebrates 
or invertebrates, whether animals or plants. Many are 
the forms developed, few are those which survive. 
Those who believe in a guiding force directing the course 
of evolution must admit that it has been singularly blind 
and inefficient, leading more often to destruction than to 
success, A 

Still, it is sometimes argued, organisms seem to get 
into a groove of specialisation, to pursue a road along 
which they can no longer stop, to become overspecialised 
by virtue of some sort of momentum driving them over 
the limits of usefulness to inevitable destruction. Thus 
over and over again we see, in the record left by fossils, 
animals acquiring a larger and larger size, and then sud- 
denly dying out. The large Amphibia of the Carboni- 
ferous, the monster Dinosaurs of the Jurassic and 
Cretaceous, the gigantic Moas (flightless birds of New 
Zealand), and among the mammals the huge Amblypods 
and Titanotheres, the giant sloths, and others, are all 
extinct. Again, some animals develop certain organs to 
an excessive extent, as, for instance, the canine teeth in 
the extinct sabre-toothed tiger (Machairodus), or the 
monstrous antlers of the extinct Irish elk. Now it is 
quite probable that these animals died out owing to over- 
specialisation, a narrow adaptation to a particular en- 
vironment accompanied by a corresponding loss of power 
of accommodation to changed circumstances ; but it is a 
mistake to assume without clear proof that the course of 
their evolution can have been useless. Variation (p. 77) 


106 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


may be useless or harmful, and doubtiess these unsuc- 
cessful forms may have got into grooves of variation ; 
but variation is not evolution. And seeing that natural 
selection looks not to a distant future but to the immediate 
advantage, there is nothing in the history of these animals 
which cannot be explained as due to the ordinary action 
of selective elimination. We have every reason to sup- 
pose that every step in increase of size gave some advan- 
tage to the giant forms over their competitors. To assume 
the contrary would be as wise as to argue that the huge 
modern Dreadnoughts are useless ships of war because 
they may possibly be driven off the seas by the relatively 
small submarines and flying machines, or to deny that 
the progressive stages in the development of these men- 
of-war must each have surpassed in usefulness those 
which went before. 

This brings us to another interesting subject on which 
palzeontology can throw some light—namely, the rate of 
evolutionary change. Some organisms have changed 
_very little through long geological periods. The mol- 
luscan genus Nucula, and the genus Patella, which in- 
cludes our common limpet, date back to the Silurian 
epoch ; the Silurian scorpion (Palzeophonas) differs little 
from modern forms; the Brachiopod Lingula has 
changed very little since the Ordovician; and many 
Protozoan skeletons are found in Cambrian rocks which 
differ but little from those of the present day. There 
can be no doubt, then, that the rate at which the various 
branches of the phylogenetic tree have grown varies 
very much. Presumably the persistent types have been 
sufficiently well adapted to keep their own place against 
competitors, though perhaps only where the struggle 
has not been very severe. The fact that they have 
changed little does not in the least prove that they have 
not varied, but merely that the divergent variations have 
not been selected. If variations are eliminated as fast 
as they occur, an organism may continue unchanged for 


THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD. 107 


an indefinitely long time. Change is no exact measure 
of variation. 

It is sometimes objected that phylogenies are insecure 
speculations, that they are made up of series put to- 
gether according to preconceived theory, that the con- 
clusions have often proved erroneous. As the gaps 
become more completely filled up, certain forms are 
found to have been placed in the wrong order or to 
belong to diverging branches rather than to the same 
stem. But there can scarcely be any doubt that in 
the main these phylogenies represent the real course 
of evolution, and such mistakes in details do not 
shake our faith in the correctness of the conclusions 
as a whole. : . 

Very important also is the evidence. of palzontology, 
concerning the gradual character of the transition from 
-one form to the other. We need not describe in detail 
the case of the horse, which is familiar to all, but shall 
only mention that it can be traced from an unspecialised 
comparatively small Eocene ancestral mammal, with five 
digits on each foot, a normal short skull, and the full 
complement of short rooted teeth. The complex pattern 
on the grinding surface of the teeth can be seen to evolve 
by almost insensible steps from the origina! six-cusped 
form, just as the lateral digits gradually become reduced 
on the feet. Exactly how gradual these transitions have 
been we cannot often yet say, but the more complete 
the evidence the smaller appear to have been the steps. 
Wonderfully gradual are the transitions described by 
Beecher in Trilobites and Brachiopods, by Hyatt and 
others in Ammonites, and in numberless other cases, 
Neumayer has traced the gradual evolution of Paludina 
neumayri, found in the lowest Pliocene deposits of 
Slavonia, into P. Hoernesi of the uppermost layers. 
Hoernes has shown that the Pliocene Cancellaria cancel- 
lata is intermediate between the Miocene and the recent 
forms of the same species, while Hilgendorf has followed 


i08 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


the transformation of Planorbis through the successive 
geological strata of Steinheim. 

In this record of the past we read the work of natural 
selection, the drastic action of elimination, and see on a 
large scale what is happening to-day not only among the 
competing groups of organisms, but among the struggling 
individuals. From the record we also learn that evolu- 
tion does not proceed along an even course such as we 
might expect to see pursued owing to the pressure of 
some internal or external directive force. On the con- 
trary, it is the rule that groups quickly expand, radiat- 
ing in various directions of adaptation. This specialisa- 
tion leads to a certain rigidity, a loss of adaptability in 
other directions, and sooner or later to a failure to meet 
new conditions, while some obscure side branch com- 
mitted as yet to no special line of adaptation acquires 
some advantageous combination of characters, enabling 
it to compete successfully with the dominant race. 
Evolution does not move along a straight line from one 
dominant specialised form to another, but by the con- 
stant uprising of new forms which supplant the old ones. 
The evidence of Paleontology is all against the theory 
of orthogenesis (the transformation of one group into 

nother along a straight line in ladder-like fashion). 
Adaptive radiation, a perpetual tendency to branch off 
in various directions, and founded on individual varia- 
tions of indeterminate character, is seen in the history of 
all groups of organisms. The number of possible lines 
of development is indefinitely great; the external en- 
vironment decides which, if any, shall succeed. 

So it is not from the specialised Amphibia that the 
reptiles have been developed, but from some early un- 
differentiated form ; neither is it from specialised Rep- 
tilia that the Mammalia have been derived. And among 
the mammals themselves, the Carnivora, Ungulata, 
_Cheiroptera (bats), the Cetacea (whales), have not de- 
scended the one from the other; but all have diverged 


EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. 109 


from some primitive adaptable ancestor. Man himself 
preserves many archaic anatomical characters, and the 
order Primates, of which he is the highest member, 
although its history is still imperfectly known, can be 
traced back to primitive Eocene forms. Extreme 
specialisation may secure temporary triumph, and in 
very uniform conditions even lasting success, but adapta- 
bility is the most precious possession, and it is the crea- 
tures most ready to meet new and changeable conditions 
which have the future before them. 


CHAPTER IX 
rd 
PSYCHOLOGY AND THE EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE 


WE have just seen that adaptability is one of the most 
useful attributes an organism can possess. In plants it 
may be highly developed, but along comparatively simple 
lines of direct response. Here adaptability is shown in 
the power to respond in different ways to a variety of 
stimuli, The case of alpine and lowland forms has 
already been mentioned (p. 41), and many others are 
familiar to botanists. For instance, the plant Ranun- 
culus acquires a very different shape and internal struc- 
ture according as it grows on dry land or in water, and 
the terrestrial or aquatic form can be developed in the 
same individual, by parts above and below the surface 
of the water. Also plants which in a normal climate 
develop ordinary stems and leaves may in dry or desert 
regions assume a very different form ; the stems become 
succulent for storing water, and the leaves become re- 
duced, spines being ‘often developed in their stead, thus 
diminishing the surface whereby water is lost in tran- 
spiration. Now these and similar changes are useful 
responses enabling the plant to accommodate itself to 
varying conditions. This manifold adaptability is not 


110 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


due, as is so often assumed, to some mysterious power 
of automatically responding favourably to stimulus, but 
doubtless to the survival of those organisms which re- 
spond in the right way. To some extent this power of 
adaptation is possessed by all organisms, and by varia- 
tion and selection may lead to the establishment of 
definite series of responses in several possible directions. 
Potentially dimorphic and polymorphic species are thus 
produced both in the animal and in the vegetable king- 
dom, but while the accommodation of plants is of this 
simple and direct character that of animals is usually far 
more complex. 

On the dangers attending specialisation we have al- 
ready dwelt (p. 108). Advantageous as it may be to 
acquire a special structure adapted to fulfilling a certain 
end with rapidity, sureness and precision, yet animals 
have, so to speak, found it more profitable still to avoid 
overspecialisation in one or even two or three directions ; 
to develop a readiness to respond to all sorts of stimuli, 
and a power of storing up the impression of past responses 
so as to benefit by “experience”—in animals has been 
built up a system of “behaviour” of such a kind that 
the character of the final response to the initial stimulus 
depends on the number and quality of the responses 
previously called forth. This power has been acquired 
with the development of elaborate discriminating sense 
organs, and a complex conducting and co-ordinating 
nervous system. 

Now this consideration brings us to the threshold of 
the vast domain of Physiological Psychology, which we 
cannot fully explore in this little volume. Yet something 
must be said about Instinct and Intelligence from the 
point of view of a scientific explanation of Evolution, while 
taking care not to trespass into the region of Philosophy.* 

* The Mechanistic explanation here adopted should not be confused 


with Materialism, a discredited system of Philosophy which denies the 
existence of anything bui the material or physical. 


EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. ill 


It was maintained above (p. 18) that the physico- 
chemical processes of life form an unbroken series of 
changes ; to these correspond the chain of mental pro- 
cesses. And we believe that to every mental process, 
whether of the “highest” kind in the mind of man or of 
the “lowest” in that of the most primitive organism, 
there corresponds some physico-chemical change. How 
intimately connected are the two sets of processes is 
matter of common knowledge. The slightest disturbance 
or interruption in the metabolism of the brain, due to an 
injury, an anzesthetic, a poison, will have its echo in a 
disturbance of the mental processes. The gradual] elabora- 
tion of the sense organs and nervous system found in the 
evolutionary series from the lowest forms up to man we 
judge to be accompanied “by a corresponding develop- 
ment of mental powers. So far as we know, neither 
the mental nor the metabolic processes can take place 
without the other. Yet, indissolubly bound together 
as they are, the one is certainly not the product of the 
other, nor can it interfere with the continuity of the 
other (p. 18). The mental and the physical series can- 
not break into each other’s continuity because they are 
not independent of each other ; what exactly isthe nature 
of the connection between them Philosophy may attempt 
to define, but Science is not called upon to describe. We 
may point out, however, that they appear to be two 
aspects of one and the same series of events; one seen 
from within and the other from without. It is the 
artificial separation of these two abstractions, body and 
mind, from the reality that has led to endless contro- 
versies about the possible action of one on the other. So 
in attempting to give a scientific explanation of evolution 
we can neither speak of mental processes as produced by 
or guided by physico-chemical processes, nor of meta- 
bolism as directed along its course by mind. Several 
theories of evolution seem ito fall into this error, notably 
the “Mnemic” theory recently supported by Semon. 


112 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


Now, if we only knew the whole series of physico- 
chemical changes which correspond to the mental pro- 
cesses, the whole story of evolution could be told from 
beginning to end from the point of view of the scientific 
abstraction as an unbroken chain of metabolic changes. 
But unfortunately we are still very far from having 
obtained this complete knowledge, except perhaps in 
the case of plants; and so, in describing the behaviour 
of animals, we constantly pass over from the physico- 
chemical to the psychological side, and describe be- 
haviour in terms of mental processes we know only in 
ourselves, but infer from external evidence to take place 
in animals also. The gaps in the physico-chemical 
description are thus filled in from the other series. The 
physiologist is, however, daily extending our knowledge 
of the metabolic processes, and as fast as he advances 
he discards the psychical “explanation.” But in doing 
so he often ignores the passage from one abstraction to 
the other, and erroneously concludes that mental pro- 
cesses are insignificant, superfluous, or non-existent. 
He imagines he has reduced them to mere physics and 
chemistry ; an error into which we must be careful not 
to fall. If the whole chain of physico-chemical meta- 
bolic processes going on in even the human body and 
brain be some day discovered, the mental processes will 
still remain untouched and incapable of being described 
in the same terms. 

The current method of dealing with mental processes, 
even morals and emotions, in a scientific description of 
evolution is then a makeshift, a provisional but con- 
venient method ; so the words feeling, memory, choice, 
and will, constantly creep into our descriptions of animal 
behaviour—no harm is done so long as their foreign 
origin is recognised. Since the two sets of processes 
correspond, we need not be astonished at finding that 
the “laws” of variation, inheritance and natural selection 
hold good in mental as in material evolution. 


EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. 113 


Having thus cleared the ground it may at once be 
pointed out that instincts correspond to simple adapta- 
tions fixed in definite directions ; they are formed of a 
series of responses which must succeed each other when 
a particular stimulus is applied and reach a predeter- 
mined end, as surely as the piece of chocolate is yielded 
up by the penny-in-the-slot machine when the right 
coin is dropped in. We may pass from the simplest 
“reflex action, such as the contraction of a muscle on 
the application of a stimulus to the skin, to the most 
elaborate instinct found in bees and other social insects, 
along a series of such direct chains of reactions of gradually 
increasing complexity. 

The scientific analysis of the behaviour of animals has 
only begun, and as a rule we“can trace but very incom- 
pletely the actual physico-chemical processes which 
underlie it. But important advances have lately been 
made in this direction, chiefly by J. Loeb, who has sug- 
gested a physico-chemical explanation of the tropisms. 
Tropism is the name given to those simple instincts, the 
material out of which the behaviour of the lower animals 
is to a great extent composed, which appear as direct 
responses to external stimuli. Thus when a moth flies 
towards a flame, or a fly to a lighted window, it is said to 
be positively heliotropic (or phototropic); when a worm 
moves away from the light it is said to be negatively 
heliotropic. Similarly Chemotropism leads animals to 
move either away from or towards certain substances of 
particular chemical composition, as for instance food and 
water ; and Geotropism leads them to move either with 
or against the force of gravity. Stereotropism is the name 
given to the peculiar instinct shown by certain animals 
to place as large a part as possible of the surface of their 
body in contact with foreign objects, and so induces them 
to creep into narrow chinks and crannies. Now although 
these tropisms may be built up and specialised by selec- 


tion into elaborate instincts, adaptations for special 
(2,031) 


114 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


purposes, they are really not primarily dependent on 
specialised sense organs and nervous systems, but are 
fundamental properties of protoplasm common to all 
animals and plants. They depend on the universal 
irritability of protoplasm, based on the instability of the 
complex compounds of which it is composed, and their 
capacity for being broken down, modified, or raised up 
by the action of external stimuli; or, in physiological 
language, they depend on changes in the metabolism 
(p. 11). A protoplasmic connection between the various 
parts of the mechanism, irritability and conductivity 
(which is only a special form of irritability), are the only 
essentials in the process. 

Tropisms have long been known to occur in plants. 
Thus shoots being negatively geotropic grow upwards, 
while the positively geotropic roots grow vertically down- 
wards, A negatively heliotropic plant grows away from 
the light, and a positively heliotropic plant towards it, 
and so on. These results are brought about by differ- 
ences in the metabolism due to the unequal action of 
the stimulus on the two sides of the plant structure. 
In the case of heliotropism, for instance, the side away 
from the source of light grows quicker than that towards 
it ; thus curvature is caused, which ceases when the grow- 
ing apex points directly to the source of light, and both 
sides are equally affected. 

Exactly the same thing happens with fixed anima: 
like zoophytes. Now Loeb, with great ingenuity, has 
applied the same explanation to the behaviour of free- 
moving animals, which turn their head towards or away 
from the source of a stimulus. For instance, in bilater- 
ally symmetrical heliotropic animals the symmetrical 
points on the right and left side are equally sensitive to 
light ; and when light falls more on one side than on the 
other there will be greater chemical activity on one side 
than on the other, and the muscles on one side will be 
more stimulated so as to move the head round towards or 


EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. 115 


away from the source of light. This inequality of muscular 
action will last until the animal is so situated as to point 
directly to or from the source of the stimulus. Thus when 
a moth tends to fly straight into the flame of a candle it is 
driven by its mechanism, not by an interfering emotion or 
will. If one eye of a moth is darkened, the insect will be 
unable to fly straight, but will continue to move in a circle. 
Animals are more or less heliotropic according as they 
possess more or less chemical substance capable of being 
decomposed by light, and their susceptibility will vary 
greatly according to temperature and other conditions 
which hasten or retard the action. A weak acid added 
to the water containing small Crustacea, like Cyclops, 
can increase their heliotropigm, or even change the 
heliotropism from negative to positive. 

Another important element in the behaviour of 
organisms is known as “differential sensibility,” or the 
reaction to sudden and marked changes in the strength 
of the stimulus. A shadow passing across a worm will 
cause it to contract; other instances easily suggest 
themselves. 

In the lower animals, as in plants, behaviour can 
be almost completely analysed into manifestations of 
tropisms and differential sensibility. Their general — 
motions when seeking food; their habit of gathering 
together in dark, warm, or damp places; their sexual 
instincts; their instincts connected with reproduction 
(the laying of the eggs on appropriate substances for the 
young to feed on, and so forth), can all be interpreted as 
corresponding to metabolic changes, though all the steps 
in the physico-chemical processes are not yet known to 
us. Interesting is the “instinct” shown by the plant 
Limaria cymbalaria. At first positively heliotropic, it 
becomes negatively heliotropic after pollination, and so 
pushes its fruits into dark crevices, lodging them in 
places favourable for the subsequent germination of the 
seeds. | 


116 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


Instincts, or mental adaptations, are “hereditary ” 
in the popular sense (see p. 42); that is to say, will 
reappear in succeeding generations under normal con- 
ditions, since they correspond to metabolic processes 
which depend on the interaction of certain constant. 
factors of inheritance with certain factors present in 
the environment. They vary, and in all probability are 
built up and preserved by natural selection according to 
their usefulness in the struggle forexistence. But simple 
reflexes and tropisms need not be useful; on the con- 
trary, as in the case of variation generally (p. 77), they 
may be useless 6r even injurious. Moreover, a tropism 
which is useful in the normal environment may be fatal 
under other circumstances—e.g. the moth and the candle. 
In so far as they have been built up by selection, in- 
stincts. will be found to be advantageous. Apparent 
exceptions may be due to their being relics of past 
adaptations fallen into disuse, or to some change in the 
environment. What we have said in previous chapters 
about. the development of the structural characters of 
organisms applies equally to the evolution and specialisa- 
tion of the metabolic processes to which the mental 
characters correspond. 

Sequences of interlocking and co-ordinated reflexes, 
each one of which sets off the next, give rise to the most 
complicated instinctive behaviour, as we see in the 
actions of our own internal digestive organs; but in 
the more elaborately differentiated. mstincts of animals 
yet another element can be found, known as “ associative 
memory.” For example, the homing instinct of insects, 
enabling them to find their way back to the nest from 
a distance, has been shown to be due to the retention of 
effects produced by previous responses. to visual stimuli. 
This lasting and cumulative effect. of responses to stim- 
ulus enters very largely into the behaviour of the higher 
animals and of man, but we know very little indeed of 
the corresponding physico-chemical processes in such cases. 


EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. 117 


This cumulation of the effects of previous responses, 
this formation of internal stimuli reacting on the be- 
haviour is, of course, no new factor in the development 
of organisms (p. 56). It is the epigenetic factor, the 
means of differentiation in the ontogeny of the individuai. 
Thus an organism will respond differently according as it 
is starved or well-fed. The storage of nutriment in the 
tissues of a plant provides an internal stimulus affecting 
its response ; so a hungry animal will behave differently 
from one that is satiated. In fact, the whole behaviour 
of an organism is determined by the condition of the 
mechanism at the time the stimulus is received, and this 
again depends on the responses previously called forth. 
It should never be forgotten, that an organism reacts as 
a whole, each response beitfe closely or remotely related 
to every other and to the entire organisation of the 
organism, 

Intelligent behaviour, from the physiological point of 
view, is prompted by indirect responses. Influences are 
brought to bear on the course of metabolic changes 
diverting them in this or that direction, in a manner 
which cannot be foreseen by an outside observer who is 
not acquainted with the entire past history of the animal. 
The final response may then appear to be spontaneous, 
and even unrelated to the initial stimulus. The influences 
above mentioned are, besides the external stimuli or 
factors of the environment, either due to the transmitted 
factors of the inheritance or the internal stimuli caused 
by the lasting effects of previous responses. 

Lastly, we are still in the dark as regards the evolution 
of consciousness, the highest stage in the development of 
the mental processes, for our knowledge of the ana- 
tomical structure and physico-chemical processes which 
accompany it is still too incomplete to enable us to de- 
termine when it first made its appearance in the animal 
series. We can tell approximately at what stage in the 
ontogeny of individuals of our own species consciousness 


118 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


begins to manifest itself as the tissues become differen- 
tiated, but as to its phylogenetic origin, we can only say 
that it appeared when the cerebral hemispheres reached 
a high state of development. 

Too often the Darwinian doctrines are represented as 
teaching that success in the struggle for existence is 
obtained only by tooth and nail, by blood and iron. 
This is a very mistaken view. Brutality, fraud, greed 
may secure temporary success; but the triumph of the 
human race over the lower organisms, and again of the 
lower civilisations over the higher, has been brought 
about, on the contrary, through mutual help, co-operation, 
self-sacrifice. These are the very bonds which hold 
societies together. Religion, art, and science all play an 
important part in evolution ; and morality appears not as 
an external force working against a ruthless and unmoral 
Cosmic Process, but as a prcduct of that very process, 
and an all-important factor in its development. In the 
iong run, it is those civilisations which are founded on 
justice and liberty, on law and order, which will succeed 
best and last longest. 

Man has conquered in the struggle for existence not so 
much because his body is more powerful, his movements 
quicker, or his senses sharper than those of other animals, 
but because of his great capacity for retaining the im- 
pressions of past responses, and for bringing them to 
bear on the response to new stimulations. To this he 
owes his marvellous powers of adaptation to new and 
varying conditions. And this great development of 
associative memory has been accompanied by a corre- 
sponding enlargement of the brain, especially of the 
cerebral hemispheres. There can be little doubt that 
the giant mammals of past ages failed, in spite of their 
formidable offensive and defensive weapons, partly be- 
cause their nervous system was not sufficiently de- 
veloped. Their brain was absurdly small as compared 
with that of ordinary mammals of to-day; indeed, it 


EVOLUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. 119 


was often scarcely larger than the brain of the gigantic 
reptiles which preceded them. It need hardly be 
pointed out that man owes his mastery of the world to 
brain-power, not brute force. Most of the peculiarities 
in the structure of the human body are closely related to 
the immense development of the brain. The size and 
shape of the brain-case has greatly influenced the de- 
velopment of the skull; and even the erect attitude and 
consequent modifications of the hind limbs, vertebral 
column, and cther parts are probably an adaptation for 
supporting the heavy weight of the brain. In other 
respects the structure of man is not very specialised, and 
differs but little from that of his nearest allies, the 
anthropoid apes. ; 

Evolution from the scientific point of view, as it ap- 
pears to an outside observer, may be represented as a 
vast and continuous series of changes in a continuous 
stream of living matter. Each stage in the process is 
determined by that which precedes it, and determines 
that which follows. The scientific generalisations based 
on the observation of non-living matter, the “laws” of 
physics and chemistry, hold good when applied to the 
changes in living matter. There is no special living 
element, no mysterious life-force ; but life, scientifically 
described, is a physico-chemical process taking place in 
the complex compounds of the ordinary elements which 
make up the protoplasm of living organisms. Meta- 
bolism, as this process is called, is due to the instability 
of these compounds, to the fact that external conditions 
or stimuli applied to them may alter their structure and 
composition. All the manifestations of life thus corre- 
spond to metabolic processes. From the very first 
origin of living protoplasm there has been an unbroken 
continuity of living processes and substance. The living 
organisms of the present day are the descendants of those 
of the past, and all the various forms of life are but the 
divergent streams from the original source of metabolism. 


120 EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS. 


Variation is due to change in the metabolism; all 
organisms are the products of the interaction of trans- 
mitted factors of metabolism (the factors of the in- 
heritance) and factors of the environment. The ever 
changing and continuous stream of living matter is 
diverted into this or that channel of differentiation and 
specialisation by the environment through natural selec- 
tion. The environment moulds the organism, and the 
organism reacts on its environment, until in the case of 
man he seems to have become master of it and to shape 
his own destiny. 


A COURSE OF READING ON EVOLUTION 


BzsipEs the standard works of Darwin, The Origin of 
Species, The Descent of Man, and Animals and Plants 
under Domestication, the reader may be recommended to 
consult the following books from among the vast number 
written on the subject : 

For the treatment of the evolution of organisms in 
general: A. R. Wallace, Darwinism, 1889 ; A. Weismann, 
The Evolution Theory, 2 vols. 1904. For metabolism and 
general physiology: M. Verworn, General Physiology, 
1899; and for the cell-theory, E. B. Wilson, The Cell, 
1900, in addition. For a short general study of variation : 
H. M. Vernon, Variation in Animals and Plants, 1903; 
and for the statistical treatment of variation and hered- 
ity, F. Galton, Watural Inheritance, 1889; and K. 
Pearson, The Grammar of Science, 1900. For mendelism : 
W. Bateson, Mendel’s Principles of Heredity, 1909 ; and 
R. C. Punnett, Mendelism, 1911. For animal tropisms, 
instincts, and intelligence: J. Loeb, Comparative Physi- 
ology of the Brain, 1905; and C. Lloyd Morgan, Animal 
Behaviour, 1900. Further, the student should read P. 
Geddes and J. A. Thomson, The Evolution of Sex, 1889 ; 
T. H. Morgan, Experimental Zoology, 1907 ; H. de Vries, 
The Mutation Theory, 2 vols. 1910-11; A. Reid, The 
Principles of Heredity, 1906. E. B. Poulton, Essays on 
Evolution, 1908 ; and Sir E. Ray Lankester, The Advance- 
ment of Science, 1890, and The Kingdom of Man, 1906, 
which contain discussions of many important problems 


in Evolution. 
11 


x iy 
: 
A 
WARP RR 
rt a \ 4 
Wel gpukout 
: yt iia 


Rawat 


Sinica 
FO a 
Nea 


* 
xi 


ee 
She 


INDEX 


ACHATINELLA, 82. 

“‘acquired characters,” 37. 
adaptation, 64, 77, 110. 
adaptive radiation, 96, 108. 
Agama, 91. 

albinism, 50. 

Allelomorphic characters, 50. 
Amphibia, history of orders, 96. 
Amphidasys betularia, 68. 
Amphisbzna, 91. 

anabolic processes, 13. 
ancestral inheritance, 72. 
Andalusian fowl, 48, 76. 
Anopheles, 67. 

Antirrhinum majus, 47. 
Archzopteryx, 90. 
associative memory, 116. 


Bacteria, 23, 45. 


9. 
Bateson, W., 46, 50, 121. 
Beecher, 107. 
behaviour, 112, and sequel. 
Bergson, 92. 
Biology, 10. 
Bonnelia, 60. 
Bonnier, 41. 
Botany, 10. 
Brachiopods, 106-107. 
Bumpus, 68. 
Biitschli, 29. 


CARBOHYDRATES, 10. 

Castile, 76. 

Celebes, 82. 

cell, the, and the cell-theory, 22-27. 
—— division, 25. 

Cesnola, Di, 79. 

characters, eMac o 

—— acqui 7. 

— allelomorphic, 50. 

chlorophyll, 14. 


chromosome, 26. 
chromatin, 22, 25. 
Cirripedes, 87. 

Clausilia laminata, 69. 
classification, 92, and sequel. 
Comparative Anatomy, 87. 


#| consciousness, 117, 


conservation. of energy and of 
matter, 12. 

continuity of protoplasm, etc., 25. 

convergence, 91. 

correlation, 72, 78. 

Correns, 47. 

Cyclops, 115. 


Darwin, Ch., 32, and sequel, 46, 55, 
60, 65, 67, 73, 76, 84, 121. 
Darwin, Erasmus, 37. 
Darwinism, 32, 37, 63. 
—— criticism of, 64, and sequel, 89. 
— 80: selective death-rate, 66, 
0. 


degeneration, 87. 


‘Dinosauria, 99. 


disease, 69, and sequel. 
domestic races, 52, 73. 
dominant 1a WAR 49, 
Doncaster, 46. 

Draba verna, 93. 
Drosophila, 58. 


ELIMINATION, 63, 95, 108. 
—— selective, 63, 68. 
Elodea canadensis, 62. 
Embryology, 87. 

energy of life, 11. 
epigenesis, 56. 

evolution as unfolding, 56. 


Factors of environment, 37, 41. 
—— of inheritance, 37, 42, 55. 
fats, 10. 

ferments, 15. 

fertilisation, 28. 


123 


124 


GALAPAGOS, 82. 

Galton, F., "34, 37, 72, 121. 

gametes (germ- cells), 27 : 

Geddes, P., and Thomson, J. A., 
21 


gemmation, 27. 
germ-cells, 27, 29. 
germ-plasm, 30. 
Giard, 59. 

Glossina morsitans, 67. 
green-plants, 14. 


HEREDITY and inheritance, 35, and 
uel. 

—— theories of, 46, and sequel. 

hermaphrodite, 28, 

heterozygote, 48. 

Hieracium, 93. 

Hilgendorf, 107. 

homozygote, 48. 

Hyatt, 107. 

Hydra, 24, 


Tamuoniry, 70. 

Inachus, 59. 

instincts, 113, 115. 
intelligence, 117. 
intercrossing, eyeupoe by, $0. 
irritability, 14-17, 

islands, fauna of, "32, 

isolation, geographical, 81. 
—— physiological, 82. 


JENNINGS, 76. 
Johannsen, 44. 
Jordan, 93. 


KARYOKINESIS, 25. 
katabolic progesses, 13. 


LAMARCK, 37, 6. 
Lankester, E. R., 20, 121. 
Leptinotarsa, 58, "69. 

life and living matter, 9, and sequel. 
— conditions, 15. 

—— nature of, 15. 

——- artificial, 19. 

—— origin of, 19. 

—— length of, 31. 
Linnzus, 61, 92. 

Loeb, J., 113, 124, 121. 
Lymaniria dispar, 62. 


MAMMALTA, 101. 
—— origin of and orders, 101. 
man, 109, 118. 


INDEX. 


Mantis religiosa, 79. 

Mendel, 46, 49. 

mendelism, 46, andjsequel. 

mental processes and mind, 110, 
and sequel. 

metabolism, 11, and sequel. 

Metaphyta, 24 

Metazoa, 24. 

mimicry, 91. 

modification, 39. 

—— not transmitted, 30, and sequel. 

Monocystis, 29. 

Morgan, C. Lloyd, 121. 

Morgan, T. H., 58, 76, 121. 

morphology, 87. 

Mucor, 24. 

Miller, Fritz, 79. 

Musca carnaria, 61. 

mutation, 39, and sequel. 

—— retrogressive, 53. 

—— progressive, 54. 

—— origin of, 55. 


Nasturtium officinale, 62. 
natural selection, 63, and sequel. 
Neumayer, 107. 
Nilsson-Ehle, 75. 
nucleus, 22. 


Nucula, 106. 
OSBORN, 96. 


> 20s 


PALZONTOLOGY, 87, 95, and ‘sequel. 
Paludina, 107. 
Pangenesis, 46. 
Paramecium, 29. 
parasitism, 82, 88. 
parthenogenesis, 28, 
Passer domesticus, 68. 
Pasteur, 20. 

Patella, 106. 

Pearson, K., 34, 35, 72, 78, 121. 
Peckham, 86. 

Petaurus, 91. 

Phaseolus vulgaris, 44, 
Phyla and Phylogeny, 87. 
Phylloxera, 62. 

Pisum sativum, 49. 
Planorbis, 108. 

Poulton, E. B., 79, 121. 
Primula sinensis, ‘42. 
Pritchard, 37. 

proteins, 10. 

Protophyta, 24. 
protoplasm, 13. 

—— formation of, 13-16. 


ee “oan eS 


INDEX, | 125 


Protozoa, 24. 
psychology, 110. 
Pteromys, 91. 

Punnett, R. C., 46, 121, 
pure lines, 45, 71, 93. 


QueTeLer, 34. 


Ranuncuuus, 109. 

recessive character, 49. 

reflex action, 113. 
regeneration, 24. 

regression, 73. 

Reid, A., 69, 121. 
reproduction, 27, and sequel. 
—— asexual and sexual, 27. 
—— of cells, 25. 

Reptilia, higtony of orders, 97. 


SAccuLINA, 59, 

Salamandra, 91. 

Sarasin, 82. 

segregation of factors, 48. 
selection, 70, 73. 

—— value, 

Semon, 111. 

Sex, 2 27, and sequel. 

ae determination of, 59. 
sexual characters; secondary, 83. 
—— selection, 84, and sequel. 
Siphonops, 91. 

soma, 30. 

specialisation, 24, 105, 110. 
species, 92, 

—— ee 93. 

Smith, G. W., 

spontaneous Petiin 19. 
sterility, 83, 93. 


stimuli, or conditions of environ- 
ment,, 16, 37: 

struggle for existence, 60, and 
sequel. 


TARAXACUM, 415, 93: 
pti’ 58, 69. 

rifolium pratense, 67. 
Trilobites, 107. 
tropisms, 113. 
Trypanosoma Brucei, 6% 
Tschermak, 47. 
Tunicates, 87. 
Typhlops, 91. 


UNGULATA, 163, 
unit characters, 49, 54. 
—— factors, 49, 54. 


VARIATION and variability, 33, and 
sequel. 
—— continuous: and: discontinuous, 


» 93. 
Vaucheria,. 24: 

Verworn, M., 121%, 

vestigial organs, 83. 
Vitalism, 

Vries, De, 35, 47, 54, 93, 127. 


Wauvacr, A. B.,, 32, 61, 67, 71, 79, 
86, 121. 


Watson, J., 34: 

Weismann, 30, 37, 46, 55, 121, 
Weldon, W., F. R., 34, 69. 
Wilson, EB. B., 59, 121. 


ZooLoey, 10. 
Zygote, 27. 


PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN AT 
THE PRESS OF THE PUBLISHERS. 


‘* We have nothing but the highest praise for these little books, and no 


one who examines them will have anything else.” — Westminster Gazette. 


Xe 


» 
PENA S YP: 


39. M 
40. 
4I. 
42. 
i 
PH 
46. 
47> 
ns 
4 


53- 
54- 


sé 


57> Dante e . t 


. Zoology: The Study of Animal Life 


2 pene A Chemistry’ ‘ 


. Organic Chem 
. The Principles et Ele 


| The Science of the Stars. 
. The Science of Light . ‘ 
. Weather-Science 

' - pnotism and Self-Education By A. M. Hutchison, M.D. 


Rane Philosop 
. Christianity and Sr Ensita Science 


THE PEOPLE’S BOOKS 


The Foundations of Science . . By W.C. D. Whetham, M.A., F.R.S. 
Embryology—The Bom enings of Life . By Prof. Gerald Leighton, M.D. 
Biology ‘ ° Fe S . By Prof. W. ist Henderson, M.A. 


~*~ ae E. W. MacBride, M.A., 
Botany: The Modern Study of Plants. By i C. Stopes, D.Sc.,Ph.D., F.L.S. 


. Bacteriology - « eo ByW. E. Carnegie-Dickson, M.D. 
The Structure of the Barth . ° - By Prof. T. G. Bonney, F.R.S. 

. Evolution . 8 m : ‘ . By E. S. Goodrich, M.A., F.R.S. 
Heredi : . By Je A. Ss. Watson, B.Sc. 


By Prof. E. C. C. Baly, F.R.S. 
By Prof. J. B. Cohen, B.Sc., F.R.S. 
- By Norman R. Campbell, M.A. 
- By P. Phillips, D.Sc. 
« By E. W. Maunder, F.R.A.S. 
- By P. Phillips, D.Sc. 
» By R. G. K. Lempfert, M.A. 


eee¢e 


lectricity - 
Radiation . ; : 


e Baby: A Mother’s Book bya Mother Bya Noche as: Woman. 
Youtt and Sex—Dangers and Safe-\ By Mary Scharlieb, M. D., M.S., & 

guards for Boys and Girls . EF. a Sibly, M. A., LL.D. 
am ub: oes otherhood—A Wite's S ae “ated 2 at M. B., 

s c a e 
Lord # elon a PE ee tel By q Russell, D.Sc., M.1.E.E. 
Wi y Prof. G. Lei hton, M.D. 

Sir illiam Huggins and spice!) By E. W. Maunder, F.R.A.S., of the 

scopic Astronomy. . Royal Observatory, Greenwich. 
Emanuel Swedenborg - By L. B. De Beaumont, D.Sc. 
Henri Bergson: The Philosophy val By H. Wildon Carr, 


Ch2 nge 6 ° s o e 
Bs Sholosy . aie eure By H. J. Watt, M.A., Ph. D., D. Phil. 


Del. : By Canon Rashdall, D. Lite, FB.A. 


Roman Catholicism . - By H. B. Coxon. 
The Oxford Movement . . - « By Wilfrid Ward. 
By W. H. Bennett, M.A., D.D. 


The Bible and Criticism . Pobre y ite D., &W. F. Adeney, M_A.,D.D. 
. The Growth of Freedom. Z . By H. Ww. Nevinson, 
Bismarck and Origin of German Empire By Prof. F. M. Powicke. 
bbe Cromwell AY bh MUD © aa Ey Hilda common M.A. 
ueen of Scots. y . By E. O'Neill 
Ceci Rhodes, 1853-1902 . By Ilan D. Colvin. 
J ipenel ayi Soldier, Statesman, Em- By Hilary Hardinge. 


.{ By Prot Prof. F. J. C. Hearnshaw, M.A., 


By E. Creill, M.A, 
By W. T. Waugh, M.A, 
By Arthur Jones, ‘M.A. 
By G. S. Veitch, M.A., Litt.D. 
By M. G. Fawcett, LL.D. 
By E. Fearenside, B.A. 
By Prof. C. Herford, Litt.D. 
By Rosaline Masson. 
By H. C. O’Neill. 
By Prof. "A. R. Skemp, M.A, 
By Flora Masson. 
By L. Maclean Watt. ~ 

By A. G, Ferrers Howell, 


Englandinthe Making. . 


England in the Middle Ages . 
. The Monarchy and the People 
The Industrial Revolution . 
Empire and Democracy . 
Women’s Suffrage . . 
A History of Greece * 
. Shakespeare . - ‘ 
Wordsworth 

Pure Gold—A Choice of Lyrics & Sonne 
Francis Bacea , ° 
The Broatés . ® 
Carlyle Pies ray es 


“TAS Spr s water ae 


THE PEOPLE’S BOOKS—~ Continued). 


58. 


60. A Dictionary 


Charles Dickens . ‘ 
of Synonyms 
Home Rule : 2 


“ee © * #@ @ 


62. Practical Astronomy . . 
63. Aviation . ° ’ ahs é 
64. Navigation , ° ° . ° 
65. P ond i e. . . ° r . 
66. Dietetics . ; . ° ° ° 
67. Aristotle . . . . . . . 
68. Friedrich Nietzsche e i ° 
69. Eucken: Philosophy of Life. . . 
jo. Experimental Psychology of Beauty . 
71. The Problem of Truth . F ° £ 
72. Church of England, . A je Rae 
73- Anglo-Catholicism . t s 4 : 
74. Hopeand Mission of the Free Churches 
75- u ism . . . . . . . 
76. Theosophy r es ° : 
78. Wellington and Waterloo . ‘ 
79. Mediaeval Socialism ... . 
80. Syndicalism . . . . 
82. Co-operation... -»- +s: « « . 
83. Insurance as a Means of Investment. 
85. A History of English Literature. 
87. ChariesLamb.. . |. jeg . ; 
88. Goethe. mics A ° ; J 
92. Training of the Child: A Parents’ 
Manual. . . ? - ° . 
OR OOM ONO ih veh a). a de 
94. The Nature of Mathematics bg 
95. Applications of Electricity for Non- 
echnical Readers . . . 
96. Gardening ee, 6 
97. Vegetable Gardeniu 3 5 
98. Atlas of the World . ‘ 


11g. Foun 

120, A History of Rome. s ; 
121. Land, Industry, and Taxation 
122, Canada . Z ; 5 

123. Tolsto 


125. 
128. 
129. 
130. 
131. 
132. 
533- 


. Robert Louis 


. Spiritualism . . ; 
. Kindergarten Teaching at Home 


. Schopenhaner . . ‘ . 
. The Stock Exchange . : 


’ Wild Flowers (209 Illustrations) 
. Principles of Logi 


M's a 
4. Greek Literature . 


Luther and the Reformation : 
Turkey and the Eastern Question 
Architecture (108 Illustrations) 
Trade Unions . . ‘ PF 
Everyday Law : thee: 
Stevenson e 
Shelley. * : x 


British Birds . . . 


Coleridge . P i - 
The Crusades . 


Cc. . 
tions of Religion . 


The Navy of To-day 
A French Self-Tutor 
Germany . : és 
Treitschke : 4 
The Hohenzollerns. 
Belgium . . «+ 
The British Army . 


\ 


By Sidney Dark. 

By Austin K. Gray, B.A. 

By L. G. Redmond Howard. 

By H. Macpherson, Jr., F.R.A.S, 
By S. F. Walker, R.N., M.LLE.E. 
By William Hall, R.N., B.A, 

By E. C. Ash, M.R.A.C. 

By Alex. Bryce, M.D., D.P.H. 
By Prof. A. E. Taylor, M.A., F. BA 
By M. A. Miigge. 

By A. J. Jones, M.A., B.Sc., Ph.D. 
By C. W. Valentine, B.A. 

By H. Wildon Carr. 

By Rev. Canon Masterman. 

By A. E. Manning-Foster. 

By Rev. Edward Shillito, M.A. 
By Ephraim Levine, M.A. 

By Annie Besant. 

By Major G. W. Redway. 

By Bede Jarrett, O.P., M.A. 

By J. H. Harley, M.A. 

By Joseph Clayton. 

By W. A. Robertson, F.F.A, 

By A.Compton Rickett, M.A.,.LL.D. 
By Flora Masson. 

By Prof. C. H. Herferd, Litt.D, 


\By G. Spiller. 


By Aaron Watson. 
By P. E. B. Jourdain, M.A, 


} By Alexander Ogilvie, B.Se. 


By A. Cecil Bartlett, 
By J. S. Chisholm. 
. Bartholomew, F.R.G.S, 


By John Macdonald, M.A. 
By Mrs. Arthur Bell. 

By Joseph Clayton. 

By J. J. Adams. 

By Rosaline Masson. 

By Sydney Waterlow, M.A, 
By F. B. Kirkman, B.A. 
By J. Arthur Hill. 


{*¥ Two Members of the National 


Froebel Union. 
By Margrieta Beer, M.A. 
By J. F. Wheeler. 
By S. L. Bensusan. 
By M. M. C. Calthrop. 
By Macgregor Skene, B.Sc. 
By Stanley Williams, B.A. 
Ry Stanley A. Cook, M.A, 
ByA. F. Giles, M.A.(Edin. & Oxon.), 
By Fredk. Verinder. 
By Ford Fairford. 
By L. Winstanley, M.A. 
By H. J. W. Tillyard, M.A. 
By Percival Hislam. 
By W. M. Conacher. 
By W. T. Waugh, M.A. 
By M. A. Migge. 
By A. D. Innes. 
By A. W. Evans. : 
By Captaia A. H. Atteridze. 


- 
’ 


#6) Be 
Cie < ad 
eye 


GS ia 


Mae 


AA 
Bree ee a 


‘ Vie 
ee § | 


i 


” 


‘ 
ek 
‘3 
i 


5 ‘ Det hy i) 
UC 
Ot on 


ey . 


G ie». rt 
ee Se pe re 


— e 


Bir Sex. 


ie 
nt, 


ef 


rr 3 a 
rs ee Aw 
far fd 


ut fy Y 


\ ae *. 
ie fay Boe -) 
“a wet yt * & 
Veh we at j 
WE aN ae Dy 
Romy 


GOODRICH, BS. QH 


The evolution of living G55 
organisms. 


a+ 1 E 
= 
pexestre 

ste sit 


= 
3: 


teases 


Sa5ts 


APES 
: = 
Sra 
= : seyistteseeten: sts 
PS oS 
Pete eee 


+ “Seo 
erataeeest 


ay 


brats 
met gt 334s 


= ee 
aI 
ae ener 


=3 


= 4 <<kaes 
TAS 

x5 

et = 


eet Rtg ad % 
Sarees 


citer 
tty 
EST 
¥ 


— =Sa5t cx 
Sour ee 
ae 


=283 atts 
terht Sane 
c = eee rea St tat 
: oe 
Settee tea | 
ree as | : 
Se ESE 
* 


eres 
Sete Beye eeis att 
SaaS = 
Sa oo oh cS 
SSS 
Serta tet 
: atte CE 
eee 
— > ——- ee oe oe ee 


Seren 
a3 
RAG eS Sas 


aS 


<—e, 


ete 
Tet Stceatstts 

ana 

== ae kh =i 

San SS 


Sao 
= eet SiS 
7 a 
= SSeS 
: = ee ha 

= area 
uy sS 


Axa