The Life and Letters of George John Romanes, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S.Romanes, George John
Science
The Life and Letters of George John Romanes, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S.
Romanes, George John
Naturalists -- Great Britain -- Biography; Romanes, George John, 1848-1894
I enclose a letter received by same post that brought yours. It
is from a former keeper of mine who is now more in the moorlands.
Other applications are out, so I hope some of them will be
successful. Very little doubt it will prove to be temperature. I
found a dead stoat here to-day; it had not turned white at all,
but then the season is very mild.
The Secretary of the R.I. is Sir F. Bramwell, Bart., F.R.S. You
had better write to him. Also to his son-in-law, Victor Horsley,
who is more of a biologist. Tell Bramwell, if you like, that I
think he ought to jump at you.
Yours very truly,
G. J. ROMANES.
Geanies, Ross-shire, N.B.: November 6, 1889.
My dear Poulton,--Many thanks for your paper, which is the
clearest exposition I have yet seen of Weismann's views. But
how about your allusion to experiments in grafting? As regards
plants, there _is_ a good deal of evidence as to the possibility
of a graft-hybrid. As regards animals, fifteen years ago I spent
an immensity of time in experimenting, and could not then find
that there was any literature on the subject. Nobody who had
grafted animal tissues had done so with any reference to the
heredity question, nor do I know of any publications on the
subject since then.
Yours very truly,
G. J. ROMANES.
Geanies, Ross-shire, N.B.: November 11, 1889.
My dear Poulton,--Although I spent more time and trouble than
I like to acknowledge (even to myself) in trying to prove
Pangenesis between '73 and '80, I never obtained any positive
results, and did not care to publish negative. Therefore there
are no papers of mine on the subject, although I may fairly
believe that no other human being has tried so many experiments
upon it. No doubt you will think that I ought to regard this fact
as so much negative evidence in favour of the new theory; and, up
to a certain point, I do, only the issue between Pangenesis and
Germ-plasm is not really or nearly so well defined as Weismann
represents, where the matter of experiments is concerned; _e.g._
it is not the case that any crucial test is furnished by the
non-transmissibility of mutilations; Darwin did not set much
store by them, though Eimer and others have done so since. In
fact all the Germans on both sides, and all the Englishmen on
Weismann's side, seem to me unjust to Darwin in this respect.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account