In view of the evidence, the conclusion is forced upon me that the suggestion that “ancestry” may explain the facts regarding _Telephone_ has no meaning behind it, but is merely a verbal obstacle. Two words more on _Telephone_. On p. 147 I ventured to hint that if we try to understand the nature of the appearance of green in the offspring of _Telephone_ bred with yellow varieties, we are more likely to do so by comparing the facts with those of false hybridisation than with fluctuations in dominance. In this connection I would call the reader’s attention to a point Professor Weldon misses, that Tschermak _also got yellowish-green seeds from Fillbasket (green) crossed with Telephone_. I suggest therefore that _Telephone’s_ allelomorphs may be in part transmitted to its offspring in a state which needs no union with any corresponding allelomorph of the other gamete, just as may the allelomorphs of “false hybrids.” It would be quite out of place here to pursue this reasoning, but the reader acquainted with special phenomena of heredity will probably be able fruitfully to extend it. It will be remembered that we have already seen the further fact that the behaviour of _Telephone_ in respect to seed-shape was also peculiar (see p. 152). Whatever the future may decide on this interesting question it is evident that with _Telephone_ (and possibly _Buchsbaum_) we are encountering a _specific_ phenomenon, which calls for specific elucidation and not a case simply comparable with or contradicting the evidence of dominance in general. In this excursion we have seen something more of the “exceptions.” Many have fallen, but some still stand, though even as to part of the remainder Tschermak entertains some doubts, and, it will be remembered, cautions his reader that of his exceptions some may be self-fertilisations, and some did not germinate[152]. Truly a slender basis to carry the coming structure! [152] In his latest publication on this subject, the notes to the edition of Mendel in Ostwald’s _Klassiker_ (pp. 60–61), Tschermak, who has seen more true exceptions than any other observer, thus refers to them. As to dominance:--“_Immerhin kommen vereinzelt auch zweifellose Fälle von Merkmalmischung, d. h. Uebergangsformen zwischen gelber und grüner Farbe, runder und runzeliger Form vor, die sich in weiteren Generationen wie dominantmerkmalige Mischlinge verhalten._” As to purity of the extracted recessives:--_Ganz vereinzelt scheinen Ausnahmsfälle vorzukommen._" Küster (22) also in a recent note on Mendelism points out, with reason, that the number of “exceptions” to dominance that we shall find, depends simply on the stringency with which the supposed “law” is drawn. The same writer remarks further that Mendel makes no such rigid definition of dominance as his followers have done.