THE NEW DARWINISM.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6290, 22 September 1898, Page 4

THE NEW DARWINISM.

sectube by captain; huttok

Under the auspices of the Philosophical In&titute of Canterbury, Captain HuttUm delivered a popular lecture last' night.,im the- Chemistry Lecture Hall of* Canterbury College, on "The New Darwinism." The President of the- Institute, Dr Evans> ocaarpiea@the- ©baiir:

Captain Hutton referred, in Opening, hiaaddress, to- some of the factors - wanting to complete the- theory promulgated by Darwin.. Darwin had, in the later editions of his " Origin of Species," admitted that natural selection by itself was not sufficient to account for organic variation, and had thus, to- some extent, anticipate the theory now held by the Neo-Da*» winists-, namely, that isolation might be found to- be a factor in the divergence* of variety. In tliis respect Darwin, differed from bis great contemporary, Wallace, who held the opinion that natural selection was of itself a sufficient cause.. The lectures- pointed out that Dr'Eomanes was the first to- bring prominently before the sc entific world the insufficiency oi" natural selection to account for organic evolution, and to emphasise - the necessity ©f including isolation as a coeval and almost equally potent factor. The new school el' thought was not antagonistic to Darwin's hypothesis •„ it <M>ly added to it and made it more complete. Tb© lecturer then described the main features of the new Darwinism.. According to the theory of natural, selection organisms diverged and developed in . a direction that was useful to them, variation being hindered in other directions. Preferential selection, which was a subordinate factor of natural selecj tion, and acted in a different manner, I was, in fact, a mutual attractLua, the action of which was almost confined to the higher forms of life. Instances of. tibis might be found amongst the birds,, many of which were most fastidious in tile selection of their mates. The lecturoj dwelt on the influence of isolation oq the production of variety, and. it was' the stress laid on this that chiefly differentiated the new from the old Darwinism. Isolation was of two . descriptions — physical, or geographical, and physiological. The former depended to a considerable degree on the power of locomotion possessed by the animals isolated. As instances of physical isolation, the lecturer mentioned che difference between the New Zealand and Chatham Island pigeons, which were identical in all respects excepting colour, and the native crow, the wattles of which were blue in the North Island and yellow in the South. This was plainly not the result of the survival of the fittest, for there was no reason for thinking that the Uhatham Island pigeon would not live in New Zealand, or the blue-wattled crow survive in the South Island. An instance of rhj siolcgical isolation might be seen In ' lli'e different times of seed-bearing in plants and in breeding times in animals,, which practically amounted to complete isolation as far as hybridising was concerned. ; In summarising- his addioss," Captain Hutton said that to uaturai selection the world owed progress, but to isolation it owed variety. The old Darwinism was purely utilitarian, for it affirmed that all variety of form or colour must be useful to its possessors, whilst the New claimed that variety might be given for. other purposes than mere use to its ictual possessors. It hal a. great pb.?° and use in tbe scheme of Nature, for it roused man's curiosity and stimulated his higher faculties by means of beauty, and gave a wider and broader view by lifting him out of the deadly region of utilitarianism. At the same time it should not be forgotten that science would never have reached its present position if it were not that it had the old Darwinism as a foundation.

At the close of the lecture, which was listened to . with the keenest of attention, Professor Bickerton proposed a hearty vote cf thank 3to Captain Hutton. This was seconded by Canon Harper, and carried by acclamation.