Heredity and Acquired Characters

Abstract

IN his letter headed “Heredity” published in NATURE of November 25 Sir Archdall Reid has not done justice to himself or to your readers. He endeavours to gain attention once more for a jocose misrepresentation of the meaning of the term “acquired characters,” and in order to do so neglects to mention the fact that in NATURE, vols. lxxxviii. and lxxxix. (1911 and 1912), the matter was very fully treated in letters from himself and others, including two from me (vol. lxxxix., p. 61 and p. 167). It is the simple fact that in those volumes Sir Archdall Reid had his fling in attempting to mystify your readers with a facetious misrepresentation of the proper use of the term “acquired characters.” The fictitious nature of the case presented by him was exposed at that time, and he adds nothing to it to-day. It would be sufficient to refer your readers to that correspondence, the mention of which is avoided by Sir Archdall Reid on the present occasion, were it not difficult for many people to obtain the volumes in which it occurs.