Assuming the foregoing origin of the innervation of the skin, I submit that between this rudimentary process and the building of sensori-motor arcs in the spinal cord and brain there is a field, almost unlimited, for initiative in the construction of new forms of animal life. The former is nothing without the latter. To leave it without proceeding further is to leave it “in the air” as military writers say. The formation of Receptors, then, both in the skin field and in the higher sense-organs, leads of necessity to the formation, multiplication and co-ordination of reflex arcs. As in an imperfectly organised telephone service after many a repeated stimuli or “rings” the messages begin to reach their destinations, and as by practice the operators better and better learn their business, so the impulses passing through receptors and nerve-fibrils become organized into more or less efficient systems of arcs, and response is secured to them by some effector of gland or muscle. It is not true of man alone that practice makes perfect. A certain feature of higher animals which distinguishes them from lower must be remembered, and that is that among them the individual becomes increasingly important. Speaking generally, the latter are born and die in large groups, and their lives resemble those of their group more closely than in the former. The struggle of the individual is vividly pictured by Professor Woods Jones in his description of the baby of the perfected arboreal animals. He shows how they and the roaming Ungulates and Pelagic Cetacea cannot indulge in large families, and that it is only those forms which have a safe retreat for their young which can avoid reduction of the size of their families, and how the higher apes still more resemble in these respects mankind, as we know it. For the proper study of the “synthesis of the individual” organism this essential fact must be kept in mind. Some Illustrations.It will be expected of course that for the claim here advanced on behalf of the predominant influence of the nervous system in the initiative of the evolutionary process some experimental or other Abraham.When from his Mesopotamian home an opulent and successful farmer decided for reasons sufficient to himself that he would leave his present prosperity for a promised land, and went out not knowing whither he went, it is manifest that the construction and organization of Abraham’s cerebral cortex was the motive power which led to this step so fraught with change to himself, his descendants, and the world. By his choice he showed the inherited structure of his brain, its nature, and perhaps its nurture, to be different from those of his family and tribe. Implicit in this venture was the introduction of a new group of people into a new environment, and their reaction to it through many generations is written before our eyes to-day in indelible characters. It was neither stature, muscular development, colour of hair, skin or eyes, properties of digestive or circulatory organs, keenness of sight, hearing, taste, smell, or touch which led to this result even though without a high degree of efficiency of these he could never have “arrived” as he did. Mohammed.The conjunction of environment with a certain organized complexity of grey matter was hardly ever more important to the world than that of Mohammed. The powerful frame, abundant black hair, wonderful dark eyes, and great imposing head may well have attracted the rich widow who “made his fortune” by marrying him, and they stood him in good stead in his later adventurous career. But nothing short of a unique arrangement of his reflex-arcs, chiefly in the association-areas of his brain, could have opened up to him the world of Asia and Europe. Columbus.Who can doubt that it was ultimately to the inherited structure of the convolutions of his brain that Columbus owed his great achievement in opening up a New World; or that to the reactionary and intense “character” of Philip’s brain the persecutions in the Netherlands were due; and on the other hand that to the brain Napoleon.Among individual men of modern times none strikes the imagination as does Napoleon. Without ignoring the tremendous outburst of the soul of down-trodden France at the Revolution, it cannot be denied that the “character” or grey matter of brain of the man of whom it is said “nothing where he had passed was as it had been before,” was the dominant and natural fact that changed the face of Europe. What physical quality had Napoleon, except those of his grey cells, which could have led him to such results on the environment into which he was cast? Migrations.Similar results in nations and tribes can easily be supplied from the great migrations of the past. The wider movements are but due to comparatively small aggregates of adventurous men, in other words to the aggregation of many similar central nervous systems. The great Western and Southern adventures of the Scythian Tribes had many contributing causes on which the historian has much to say, and they were physically highly efficient for their new career, but, reduced to the simplest elements, it was neither their great stature, strong muscles, flaxen hair, nor blue eyes, but the cerebral constitution of a comparatively small group of them which brought part of the nation to the promised land, and left another and large part in their homes beyond and along the Danube. The subsequent story of the latter may well be compared with the invaders of Gaul and Italy in connection with initiative in evolution. The successive invasion of Britain by Low German tribes in the fifth century, and the Scandinavian hordes of Swedes, Danes, Norwegians, Letts and Finns in the eighth and ninth teach the same lesson. The later condition and development of the Northmen in France, Italy, Spain, Sicily and Britain have only to be compared for a moment with that of their races who remained in Norway, Sweden and Denmark and their descendants, to bring clearly before one’s mind the profound influence exerted by the cerebral constitution of the original Viking hosts on their career in their new environments, and, indeed, on the environments themselves; as in intermarriage with their conquered foes. These examples have been chosen for the reason that one feature is common to them all, the introduction of an individual or group into new environments by reason of the constitution of their brains, irrespective of the contributing factors. If these be sound analogies they bear closely on the matter of initiative in the evolution of new forms of life. The men in question came to their task, in their day, with a certain equipment of brain derived from many ancestors and much nurture. Unconscious arbiters of their fate and that of multitudes who should follow them, they initiated a course of physical and cerebral evolution of which we can see much revealed before our eyes. The motive power of their conduct bears a relation to their physical forms that the engines of a motor-car do to its varied forms of body. The latter are modified indefinitely to suit convenience, comfort and grace, but fundamentally they exist and are energised by the former, just as structure is modified for the performance of function. This fact is occasionally brought vividly to the mind of an observer when he first passes a Rolls-Royce car in all its glory and magnificence, and then a rough squalid kind of trolly in which the engine-parts of a similar future Rolls-Royce are out for trial. In principle it is not a long step from these illustrations to the diverse environments of animals in which their lot is cast, and their reaction to them as to behaviour and structural change. Some Changes in Habits of Man.There are two current views as to the present erect posture of man, one which traces it to the adoption of a new posture by a pronograde four-footed ancestor, and the other that man’s ancestors were “never typically pronograde with four supporting limbs,” but derived from an arboreal stock in which the forelimbs were mobile rather than stable. Whenever or wherever man became orthograde he opened up for himself and his descendants immense Leaving, then, the immediate ancestor to work out his own destiny in his new terrestrial home, we must as before proceed backward in the history of animal life in the line of Primate ancestry. Primate Ancestry.It is generally agreed to trace the Primates back to an active pioneer animal form which took to the trees, and which arose out of the widely-spread Insectivores. This derivation will probably satisfy any reasonable genealogist. But, if we may use a parallel in human families, this active animal was as different from its congeners as Napoleon was from his four brothers who played a part in European history, and it is not necessary to say more as to the significance of this fact than that the relative importance of “chassis” and “body” is again a useful analogy. But we need to ask what those congeners did if we are to succeed in understanding the Napoleon-like course of him who became our Primate ancestor. From the original widely-spread and plastic raw material of the Insectivores allied forms took different lines, and their stories are Insects, Mollusca, Birds.The grouping of animals by structural characters, and by affinities which are assumed, though based on almost undeniable evidence, whether into species, families, classes, phyla or sub-phyla, has its apotheosis in Mollusca and Insects. As to the second of these immense groups it has always seemed strange that their colourings and structural characters should have received such intensive study from Weismann to the exclusion of Mollusca, when he set out to prove his stupendous negative, and still more that of Vertebrates, among which his chief difficulty and desired triumph would seem to have lain. Mollusca though invertebrate are held by many to be in the line of ancestry of the highest forms of life, and at any rate insects are not. They are most fruitful fields indeed in which Nature has been able to show what she could do by her stern selective powers, but, from the point of view of descent with modification, may be fairly compared to a review of an army in time of peace, or the Kriegspiel of a German military staff. He who concerns himself with the fundamental difficulties of the problems at issue in evolution must make his notes of what experts tell him Insectivores.The critical territory of vertebrate, and still more of Mammalian forms, in which the genealogist pictures the five main groups of Insectivores, looking about them, if one may so speak, in the world around and pondering which of many paths they shall pursue, resembles certain centres that may be seen in towns where three, four, five, or seven different roads are open to the traveller, each with its incalculable effects on his ultimate career. If one may change here the metaphor it may be said that the Insectivores are the watershed of the Five Rivers of higher life. However much the wayfaring insect-feeders have diverged from this broad centre in structure, and however much the laws of genetics have widened this divergence, the facts of function stare one in the face when such descriptions of three of the four orders outside the Primate stock are pondered—Flesh-feeders, Herbivorous animals, Burrowers and Gnawers. These time-honoured names appealed strongly to older zoologists, and in them is implicit a large body of evidence for initiative in their evolution by pioneering work on the part of their ancestors. Though in these days Prototheria include Monotremes, One-vent animals, Metatheria, Marsupials or pouched animals, and Eutheria Insect-feeders, and though Mammals derive their indispensable name from the function by which they feed their young, the most severe of systematists cannot clear his mind from the old leaven of function in all these terms. They imply momentous potentialities prior to new structures, and the modern fails to ban entirely such functional names. I believe there is here no juggling with names and words on my part, but a stone in the foundation of the unambitious building which I am seeking to rear. It is ultimately connected with a directive power as well as the formation of sensori-motor arcs in the central nervous system. Is it possible or probable that the factors which led some group to the water alone, some to a life in water and on land at different parts of their lives, some to a crawling life on land and partly in water, some to the air and trees, some to nocturnal, some to hybernating, some to burrowing life, some to a diet of flesh, some to one of The Place of the Nervous System in Evolution.The constitution of the nervous system is conditioned by conduction, its fundamental and primary function. Its processes consist in the transmission of impulses from receptive fields to effective reactions through devious paths in a region which, even to-day, is a jungle, with many further secrets for physiology to reveal. From this point of view the nervous system may be looked at as a clearing-house and storehouse of impulses on their way in, on their way through, and on their way out. If so, the making of new reflex-arcs is a process which has gone on simultaneously with the formation of receptors in the skin, the higher sense-organs and such deep structures as muscles, and that of effectors of infinite variety—and these are called conveniently adaptations. When we hear from Professor Sherrington that the afferent fibres with their private paths which enter the spinal cord outnumber three times those which leave it, and that those of the cranial nerves should be added, so that the afferent fibres may be reckoned as five times more numerous than the efferent, we get a vivid idea of the fundamental importance of the formation and compounding of reflex-arcs into systems. Without that the most sensitive receptors and the widest range of structures and organs, small and great, would be as nothing and things of naught. A neurone is the anatomical, as the reflex-arc is the functional unit of a central nervous system. Just as it is profitless to consider apart the engines and body of a motor car, as working machine, so is it to picture neurones and reflex-arcs separately in the living nervous system except for the purpose of an ideal construction. In common with the organs and structures of higher animals they have to pass, as historical structures, through the stages of initiation, repetition of rudimentary function, and selection by trial and error, till the “canalizing force of habit” issues in rudimentary and increasingly efficient effectors. It is in this final stage where the In the foregoing consideration of the formation of receptors of the skin it was assumed that certain common stimuli of the environment hammer out for themselves paths in the nerve-fibrils of the skin and by ceaseless repetition lay down not only the receptor, which may be called the terminus a quo, but also the afferent fibres which ultimately find their way into the grey matter of the cord and brain. That this is the initial stage of the construction of the higher nervous system can hardly be denied. But it carries the problem of the synthesis of the organism but a little way unless it be coincident with the construction of new reflex-arcs and their co-ordination into systems. Till this stage be reached in a rudimentary form the most cunning and exact adaptations and structures, or, as they may be broadly called effectors, will not advance the efficiency of the organism in the smallest degree. If the receptor be the terminus a quo the effector is the terminus ad quem. This is so obvious that it may be waved aside as a truism not worth the notice of a zoologist concerned with the major problems of biology. It may seem to challenge in a highly speculative region and manner the labours of the biometrician and Mendelian, but, if fairly met it no more encroaches on their territory than do the labours of the engineers who invented the first and crudest chassis of a motor car upon the elaborate and brilliant ingenuity, taste and skill of the coachbuilders who turn out the “body” of a sumptuous Rolls-Royce of 1920. But the latter would never have “arrived” if the former had not made his slow and arduous trials and errors and final success. So here, as in many other subjects, a truism has its use. If the biometrician and Mendelian will only abstain from erecting notice-boards to proclaim “No thoroughfare here,” we shall not be put down as trespassers or poachers on their ground and may range at large in certain fields of speculation. Some Neural Phenomena.Among numerous phenomena of nervous reactions discovered by the research of physiologists certain have a close bearing on the formation of receptors, afferent fibres and reflex-arcs, especially those of Delay, Summation, Fatigue, Block or Resistance, Localization, Facilitation and Inhibition. Facilitation.But of all these important reactions in nervous tissues none bears so closely on the problem of the formation of reflex-arcs as that of Facilitation. This is equivalent to the Law of Neural Habit of the physiological psychologist, and is bound up with the highly important Law of Forward Direction, which Professor Starling says might as well be spoken of as the Irreciprocal conduction of nerve-arcs. The Law of Forward Direction of sensori-motor arcs is too well known to need here any description. But when this law is taken into account the phenomenon of Facilitation is seen to throw a strong light upon the earliest and rudimentary formation of specialized nerve-fibres, reflex-arcs and Final Common Paths leading to the effector glands or muscles. Facilitation is described shortly by Professor Starling as follows. If the passage of a nervous impulse across a synapse or series of synapses in the central nervous system be too often repeated, fatigue is produced, and there is an increase of the block at each synapse. If, however the stimulus be not excessive and the impulse not too frequently evoked, the effect of a passage of an impulse once is to diminish the resistance, so that a second application of the stimulus provokes the reaction more easily, and he adds that the result of summation of stimuli is in fact in the direction of removal of block. When an impulse has passed once through a certain set of neurones to the exclusion of others it will tend, other things being equal, to take the same course on a future occasion, and each time it traverses this path the resistance in the path will be smaller. Education then is the laying down of nerve-channels in the central nervous system, while still plastic, by this process of Facilitation along fit paths, combined with inhibition (by pain) in the other unfit paths. He makes the important statement that Facilitation is of great interest in connection with the development of “long paths” in the central nervous system and, more especially with the acquirement of new reactions by the higher animals. (Italics not in the original). Raw Materials of the Central Nervous System.The raw materials of higher central nervous systems are furnished even in lowly Vertebrates by the neurones and their processes, and the pathways into the grey matter by the “canalizing force of habit” in the receptors and afferent fibres. Facilitation, discovered in higher Vertebrates, such as dogs and cats, throws backwards a light on the earliest struggles towards success and integration among phyla, sub-phyla and smaller groups, and here again the well-known may lead to the less-known. We may then Integration of Raw Materials.Every group of animals in the higher ranks has its own entailed property of innate reflexes, for example, the reflexes which subserve the reflex functions of the cord: those of locomotion, muscular and vascular tone, micturition, defÆcation, impregnation and parturition. These exist in an animal of the spinal level whether or not it remains purely aquatic, partly aquatic, partly terrestrial, arboreal or terrestrial. As the progressive groups ascend the ladder of life they add to this inalienable heritage, gained we need not here ask how, fresh reflex-arcs by response to new initial stimuli, forging them by the incident of use. So, the original acquirements in the past levels serve as starting points for raising the degree of their Evidence.It will be asked what evidence there is for the view here put forward that such is the order and method of the construction of the central nervous system. There are two classes of evidence. The first direct, and the second indirect and resting on inference. The well-known leads to the less-known and inferred. Direct evidence of the foundation of new reflex-arcs and their organization is of course small. The conditions, such as the duration of human life, preclude any extensive formation under experiment of new reflex-arcs, but enough is known to enable one to follow the backward way with some confidence. As to the inheritance of these, the evidence rests on opinion and tremendous probability, but as the only problem with which I am concerned here is that of initiative I think it better to leave the matter of transmission to a dispassionate consideration of the probability of its occurrence. Direct Evidence.The prolonged researches of over twelve years of Professor Pawlow and his colleagues on dogs afford a body of evidence as to the possibility of producing new reflexes in the life of an individual which have never been questioned. In 1913 at Groningen, before the International Congress of Physiologists, he gave a brief account From these limited but cogent pieces of evidence I turn to the larger but confirmatory lines of indirect evidence and inference, of which such works as those of Professors Sherrington, Bayliss, and Starling, the notable address of Professor Macdonald at Portsmouth Facilitation.From Professor Starling’s Principles of Human Physiology I may again quote part of his account of Facilitation or “Bahnung.” “When an impulse has passed through a certain set of neurones to the exclusion of others it will tend, other things being equal, to take the same course on a future occasion, and each time it traverses this path the resistance in the path will be smaller. Education is the laying down of nerve-channels in the central nervous system, while still plastic, by the process of ‘Bahnung’ along fit paths combined with inhibition (by pain) in the other unfit paths. Memory itself has the process of facilitation for its neural basis,” again, “stimulation of one anterior root produces no definite movement of a group of muscles, but partial contraction of a number of muscles which do not normally contract simultaneously. Thus, stimulation of a sensory nerve may provoke either flexion or extension of a limb, not both simultaneously. Stimulation of the motor roots will cause simultaneous contraction of both flexor and extensor muscles. It is this subordination of morphological to physiological arrangements in the limbs which has necessitated the foundation of limb-plexuses.” (Italics not in the original). Professor Graham Kerr in his work on Embryology before mentioned says: “In early stages of Evolution, whether phylogenetic or ontogenetic, we may take it that vital impulses flitted hither and thither in an indefinite manner within the living substance and that one of the features of progressive evolution has been the gradual more and more precise definition of the pathways of particular types of impulse, as well Professor Macdonald, in the Portsmouth address referred to, speaking of the states of the cells under excitation, rest, and inhibition, says “excitation is associated with an increase in pressure of certain particles within the cells; in rest these particles are in their normal quantity and have their normal number. During inhibition they are decreased in number or have a retarded motion. Thus it happens that the excited cell tends to grow in size, on the other hand the inhibited cell tends to diminish, and the resting cell to remain unaltered in the nervous system. Structure is everywhere the outcome of function.” Speaking of the relationship of parts within the nervous system, “In so far as it is fixed, it is a sign of the orderly action of circumstance upon the structures of the body, and the result rather than the cause of the monotony of existence. I hold it as probable that all the individual structures of the nervous system, and so in the brain, have just so much difference from one another in size and shape and in function as is the outcome of that measure of physical experience to which each one of them has been subjected; and that the physiological function of each one of them is of the simplest kind. The magnificent utility of the whole system, where the individual units have such simplicity, is due to the physically developed peculiarities of their arrangement in relation to one another, and to the receptive surfaces and motor-organs of the body.” As to the lens-system of the eyeball he remarks, “Surely there is no escape from the statement that either external agency cognisant of light, or light itself has formed and developed to such a state of perfection this purely optical mechanism, and that natural selection can have done no more than assist in this process.” He applies the same conclusion to the formation of the sound-conducting and resonant portion of the ear as well as the semi-circular canals and to the cerebellum. These statements are not strictly associated with this chapter but bear by analogy very strongly on the matter at issue. Indeed the whole of this address might be utilised by a junior counsel for Lamarck if he rested alone on the authority of a leading physiologist. The same may be said I regret the necessary length of these quotations but, on account of them, can the better be suffered to finish this study, when I briefly consider certain well-known nervous reactions in the cat and dog as to their probable origin. It would be a highly interesting thing to hear an exposition by an expert of all the reflexes and reflex-arcs of such a system as those which in a cat, dog, ape, or man are concerned with the passage of a morsel of food from the mouth through all its chequered and varied career till it undergoes metabolism and excretion, but I could not do it if I would, and would The Scratch Reflex.The scratch-reflex in the dog, which like the tendon-reflex in man was in my youth a subject for schoolboy tricks, has received a vast amount of attention and research from physiologists to whom it has brought valuable fruit. It is a familiar phenomenon in a familiar friend of man. There is a saddle-shaped area on the back of the dog over which it was found empirically that even a light stimulus when applied rhythmically, produces the “scalptor-reflex” or a reflex rhythmical action of the flexor muscles of the leg on the same side, calculated to remove the irritating causes of the stimulus. This includes a series of receptors in the skin leading to a spinal segment in the region of the shoulder, a long neurone in the cord, then a motor neurone, the axon from which activates the flexor muscles of the leg and produces scratching. It is described as an efferent arc from receptor to the motor neurone, from which the Final Common Path supplies the motor apparatus or effector. Professor Sherrington says that in this reflex a single stimulus which is far below threshold intensity is found on its fortieth repetition and nearly four seconds after its first application to become effective and provoke the reflex and that its frequency is about 4.5 per second. The reflex movement remains rhythmic and clonic under the strongest as under weaker stimulation. When it is easily elicitable the scratch-reflex can be evoked by various forms of electrical as well as mechanical stimulation, but, when not easily elicitable, electrical stimulation fails whereas rubbing or other mechanical forms of stimuli still evoke it, though less vigorously than usual. This reflex can also be set aside by the “nociceptive arc from the homonymous foot” or, in other words, a nocuous stimulus to the leg of that side produces “interferences which amounts to inhibition.” Empirically it is easy to notice also that if the “scalptor-reflex” can be elicited on both sides of the body, the dog when standing will momentarily lose the power in the hind legs. Note.—The rhythm of this reflex act is so special even to the layman that lately I had a singular confirmation of its stereotyped Purposes of Reflexes.All reflexes being purposive this particular innate reflex is acknowledged to have for its purpose the grooming or cleaning of the skin over its hereditary territory. This introduces its connection with initiative here propounded, and the justification for its introduction is contained in Professor Sherrington’s statement that “In the analysis of the animal’s life as a machine in action there can be split off from its total behaviour fractional pieces which may be treated conveniently, though artificially, apart, and among these are the reflexes we have been attempting to decipher”—scratch-reflexes and others. There seems to be no reason for the existence and stereotyped character of this reflex except the need or rather the desire (if one may use a convenient but inaccurate term) on the part of the dog to remove an irritant which disturbs its comfort when at rest. Some “minor horrors,” probably fleas moving across the skin-receptive field of its shoulder and back, must be assumed to be the irritant in question. This touches the great question of the initiative of this remarkable reflex, which seems more fixed and powerful in the dog as we know him than that other reflex which leads him to turn tail and flee immediately he sees a boy stoop down as if to pick up a stone. I dare say a clever advocate on the opposite side might impress a jury by building up a case under which an adaptation to a protective need would be conceived as responsible for the rapid flight at the sight of the threatening attitude of the boy. Such a reconstruction is not required, for it is perfectly clear that in the history of the domesticated dog the selection of such an adapted reflex could have no place. The survival-value of this reflex would be nil, for the number of dogs killed by a stone or maimed for life would be so negligible that the production of a specialised reflex for the purpose by selection or survival of the fittest would not arise. Obviously the danger would be intermittent and rare; and dead dogs tell no tales. On the other hand it would be highly unpleasant for dogs to be hit by stones and educability would lead them to avoid the stooping attitude associated with missiles. We are told on high authority that not education but educability is transmissible, and yet this humble reflex appears in very young dogs that could hardly if ever have known the impact of a stone. Incidentally we are compelled to remember how in past battles of our youth the aim both of “ourselves and the enemy” was deplorably poor, and not from want of practice. This school-boy-stone reflex is either an example of educational effects transmitted or of a minute bit of the unpacking of an original complexity which it would require the brain of a de Quincey to work out. But if we suppose the initial stages of such a stimulus as the occasional impact of a stone in many generations to be slowly ingrained in the skin-receptors, reflex-arcs and receptors we do not need opium either for the acceptance of orthodox dogma or to aid us in the Mendelian alternative to a very simple ideal construction. This digression bears on the initiative of the more important scratch-reflex, and it is profitable to ask “are not both of these reflexes in dogs examples of Evolution of the Indifferent?” Is it possible to imagine that from its inception to its fully-formed state, with a specialised territory of skin-receptors accurately mapped out, with receptor neurones, reflex-arcs and adapted effectors, this scratch-reflex can have arisen through Germinal Selection or selective processes within the germ? At no stage can anything more than a contribution to more or less comfort to the animal be held to result from its operation. It is strangely reminiscent of the proceedings of an elderly man after lunch on a hot day when he protects his head against house-flies with a handkerchief. I am aware that it is but one of a large number of reflexes produced for the purpose of grooming the trunk head or limbs of animals as low down in the scale as the house-fly or grasshopper, many of which were beautifully described a few years ago by Miss Frances Pitt in the National Review in an article dealing with small mammals, chiefly rodents. But I have availed myself here as elsewhere, of the liberty of doing what Professor Sherrington says we may do, and consider this scratch-reflex as split off from the rest of the animal’s behaviour for the purpose of analysis. He also says in discussing the subject of parasites moving across the receptive surface of the skin that the ulterior purpose may be the removal of what “would confuse its function as a receptive surface to more significant environmental stimuli.” This statement is hypothetical and the problem obscure; but at any rate we know this that the removal of the parasite must conduce to the greater comfort of the dog without any more recondite purpose. The one suggested by Professor Sherrington would in some possible but very vague I submit the statement as to the scratch-reflex in the dog that from beginning to end it is an indifferent mechanism and the probability is immense that its initial stages were governed alone by repeated stimuli from parasites which produced receptors, conducting fibres afferent neurones and efferent neurones, leading into the Final Common Path controlling the flexors of the hind limb. It would then come under the Law of Subjective or Hedonic Selection formulated by Professor Stout in the words: “Lines of action, if and so far as they are unsuccessful, tend to be discontinued or varied; and those which prove successful to be maintained. There is a constant tending to persist in those movements and motor attitudes which yield satisfactory experiences, and to renew them when similar conditions recur; on the other hand those movements and attitudes which yield unsatisfactory experiences tend to be In this connection a statement from Professor McDougall’s work may be advantageously quoted. He says that “It is characteristic of those (arcs) of the higher or third level that their organisation, their interconnections, by means of which the simpler neural systems of great complexity, is congenitally determined in a very partial degree only, and is principally determined in each individual by the course of its experience. The arcs of the higher level thus constitute the physiological basis or condition of docility, the power of learning by experience.”88 (My italics) Scratch Reflex of the Cat.There is a notable difference between the scratch-reflex of the dog and that of the cat, especially as to the site of its receptive-field. That of the dog has been referred to, but it appears to be generally accepted that the cat has no such saddle-shaped or indeed other area of skin receptive-field on its back or flanks. I have repeatedly tried by various mechanical stimuli, applied both irregularly and rhythmically, to evoke a scratch-reflex in a cat, young or adult, on the surface corresponding to that of the dog, and have found no response. This has been tried both when the animal was awake and when asleep. But the receptive field of the cat’s scratch-reflex has received careful and elaborate attention, which is described in a paper by Professor Sherrington in the Journal of Physiology, Vol.LI. No. 6. By means of delicate stimuli, mechanical and electrical in a decerebrate cat, the receptive-field of the scratch-reflex has been accurately delineated in the pinna, and several other pure reflexes have been obtained. These are protective of the pinna; some, the retraction and folding reflexes seem directed against irritant touches, e.g. the settling of fleas—or against exposure to injury in fighting; others, the cover and head-shake and scratch-reflexes against the ingress of foreign matter, such as dust, water, insects, into the meatus and ampulla. The threshold for their elicitation is extremely low, that is to say, they require very gentle stimuli to evoke them, while with the exception of the scratch-reflex they are elicited with difficulty and uncertainty by electrical stimuli (My italics) to which the animal has been subjected in the course of its total experience. He adds that the pinnal reflexes are readily obtained in the normal animal, and I may allude here to some small observations I made on a normal young cat In the course of these observations on a young cat I examined the various regions of the back and flanks with mechanical stimuli of different degrees of strength. These were applied during sleep and I found that it was more often during a moderate than a light or deep sleep that the following results were shown—chiefly under the stronger stimuli the tail was raised sharply and swept in a circular way, and this would be repeated according as the stimulus was applied; but at the same time there was shown a strong, irregular twitching along the flank, extending forwards to a point near the level of the shoulder. This latter reflex would appear to be a reaction on the part of the panniculus carnosus. Both the reflex of the muscles of the tail and this of the flanks appear to be connected in their origin with movements of parasites in their respective territories. In considering the scratch-reflex in the cat a subtle bit of adjustment is found. That coarse and simple scratching of its ear, which we see so often in the cat, must have often astonished us for its vigour and yet its bloodless character. This action is of course a purposeful one, for it goes on when the animal is awake. Here if anywhere this profoundly hedonistic animal shows that for it the laws of comfort are its laws of conduct. It is clear that there may be two processes or conditions involved in its bloodless violence. On the one hand the reflex retractile mechanism of the claws may be kept in abeyance by another reaction which is pre-potent; on the other, it is a fact that the hind foot in the cat is furnished with claws which are much blunter than those of the fore foot. As far as I have been able to examine cats of different Certain minor but persistent reflexes may be briefly mentioned in support of this side of the evolutionary process. In the dog and cat, as we know them, the action of the muscles of the tail by which it is elevated during the act of defÆcation is very suggestive of a reflex acquired by a very small degree of physical comfort and repeated in countless individuals, wild and domesticated. I have seen not only this but a few small scratches made by a cat before defÆcation in a kitten as young as three weeks old. It is also mentioned in illustration of a vestigial character that a horse will paw the ground with no immediate apparent object, the act being derived from ancestors which thus cleared away snow from the ground. This is claimed, doubtfully I think, as a vestige of a formerly useful habit but seems more probably to be one of these indifferent reflexes connected with comfort than with survival-value. It will be observed that in this branch of the case for Lamarck v. Weismann the indirect evidence from inference far exceeds in amount that of direct experimental evidence, but from the nature of the problem under consideration this could not be otherwise. If we may again look back in thought over the long series of animals, from man downwards, we shall picture those of the spinal level striving (with apologies for the use of an anthropomorphic word) to reach the sensory level and finding out the fact that few there be that enter therein. Again we see in vision the higher creatures of the sensory level reaching forwards to the strait paths of primate existence, and again finding the difficulty of self-advancement that their predecessors found. We see the elect few of these, by a happy combination of nature and nurture, uprearing to glory and honour the primate stock with its culmination in man. A long vista indeed and a vision, but assuredly no mere figment of the imagination, as some of the slender facts and arguments here would seem to show. With Professor Bateson we personify |