He proceeds to a discussion of the _Telephone_ and _Telegraph_ group and recites facts, which I do not doubt for a moment, showing that in this group of peas--which have unquestionably been more or less “blend” or “mosaic” forms from their beginning--the “laws of dominance and segregation” do not hold. Professor Weldon’s collection of the facts relating to _Telephone_, &c. has distinct value, and it is the chief addition he makes to our knowledge of these phenomena. The merit however of this addition is diminished by the erroneous conclusion drawn from it, as will be shown hereafter. Meanwhile the reader who has studied what has been written above on the general questions of stability, “purity,” and “universal” dominance, will easily be able to estimate the significance of these phenomena and their applicability to Mendel’s hypotheses. _D. Miscellaneous cases in other plants and animals_. Professor Weldon proceeds: “In order to emphasize the need that the ancestry of the parents, used in crossing, should be considered in discussing the results of a cross, it may be well to give one or two more examples of fundamental inconsistency between different competent observers.” The “one or two” run to three, viz. Stocks (hoariness and colour); _Datura_ (character of fruits and colour of flowers); and lastly colours of Rats and Mice. Each of these subjects, as it happens, has been referred to in the forthcoming paper by Miss Saunders and myself. _Datura_ and _Matthiola_ have been subjected to several years’ experiment and I venture to refer the reader who desires to see whether the facts are or are not in accord with Mendel’s expectation and how far there is “fundamental inconsistency” amongst them to a perusal of our work. But as Professor Weldon refers to some points that have not been explicitly dealt with there, it will be safer to make each clear as we proceed.